open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Speed-tank balancing : absolute top speed limits (class/race specific)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5

Author Topic

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.08 06:29:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 11/07/2008 21:45:27

What if ships would actually have an absolute max speed cap attribute too, not just a base speed cap ?

Anything above that and it just reduces sigradius instead of going faster Twisted Evil
Alternatively, you could have a portion reducing sigradius, and the rest increasing agility.
Really, anything EXCEPT more speed... give them something else instead, so that all those "pimp modules" wouldn't be useless, but no longer insanely overpowered in that particular combination.

And since this value could be easily and manually set for each ship individually, one could balance it however you damn well please for each ship size, class and race.

___

CLARIFICATION

Also, it's not like I'm asking for a total removal of speed-tanking or anything like that.
Most speed-tank fits go way below whatever "speed limits" would be enforced by this change, only already insanely expensive fits would suffer any significant "performance degradation".

Basically, something like battleship top speed around 2km/sec, battlecruisers around 3km/sec, cruisers 4km/sec, destroyers 6km/sec (lol) and frigates 8km/sec.
And when I say "around", I mean plus minus 20% or so depending on race, class and tier.
For instance, I have no problems with a 2300mps Panther, a 2150mps Vargur or Typhoon, but a Maelstrom should probably only get 1650mps tops or therabouts, while a Rokh more like 1600mps tops.

___

DECONSTRUCTING THE CRITICISM SECTION


1. It would make speed-tanking modules useless !

Not really. Sig radius reduction is pretty damned important too, especially since there's only two other ways to reduce signature radius (three if you're flying an interceptor).
And also, extra agility is always nice. Or whatever other trade-off you wish to offer INSTEAD of additional speed past a certain point.


2. Having a maximum speed cap is stupid !

Not more or less stupid than having a base top speed in the first place.


3. Why speed and not other stats then ?

Because at least two weapon systems in the game can be easily countered by excessive speed (missiles and drones) regardless of any other factors.
And because a lot of PvP modules (web, scram) are highly range-dependant, therefore excessive speeds not only reduce their effectiveness, but actually render them completely useless past a certain point.


4. So what's wrong with battleships and cruisers and such flying faster than frigates or even some interceptors ?

Hmm... pretty much, well, EVERTHING. DUUH !


5. Nano-whiner !

Ad hominem attack with no substantiation ? HOW CUTE ! Next ?



6. Train for a Huginn/Rapier ! Evolve or die ! And other such things.

Why thank you, I already did train for them a long time ago, if you must know.
That doesn't change anything in the fact that the OTHER THREE RACES HAVE NO REASONABLE OPTION in their fleet make-up.
You're not seriously suggesting that there should be one and only one race able to fight that ?


7. There are plenty of counters to nanoships already, not just minnie recons !

Not really. Unless by "counter" you mean "the nanoship pilot must be brain-dead to fall for it and stick around".
And when the nano-tactics is employed in a small fleet scale (or, not even so small fleet, for that matter), there's really not much you can do but twiddle your thumbs while they get bored and leave... and that's the best case scenario for the non-nano larger fleet.


8. There's nothing wrong with nanos !

CCP have repeatedly stated that they see this as a problem, and the only issue is HOW to "fix" it... not wether a fix is needed or not. A fix WILL come eventually, in some form or another : either a MWD nerf (harsher penalties, lower boostm etc), a propulsion jamming boost (longer-ranged, less slowdown types of webs ; higher grid/capacitor use, longer-range scramblers), a drone/missile/ammo upgrade (new T2 anti-nano drones or missiles, some high-tracking low damage T2 ammo version), etc.

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.07.08 06:31:00 - [2]
 

Originally by: Akita T
What if ships would actually have an absolute max speed cap attribute too, not just a base speed cap ?
Anything above that and it just reduces sigradius instead of going faster Twisted Evil

And since this value could be easily and manually set for each ship individually, one could balance it however you damn well please.



Why not just remove all overdrives and polycarb rigs?

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2008.07.08 06:35:00 - [3]
 

What if ships would actually have an absolute max shield recharge attribute too, not just a base speed cap ?
Anything above that and it just reduces sigradius instead of going faster Twisted Evil

And since this value could be easily and manually set for each ship individually, one could balance it however you damn well please.

So why should speed bear this nerf but nothing else?

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.08 06:39:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Vaal Erit
What if ships would actually have an absolute max shield recharge attribute too
Anything above that and it just reduces sigradius instead of going faster Twisted Evil

Drake with 30 shield/sec peak recharge but 65m sig radius ? HELL YEAH ! Where do I subscribe ?

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2008.07.08 06:42:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Vaal Erit
What if ships would actually have an absolute max shield recharge attribute too
Anything above that and it just reduces sigradius instead of going faster Twisted Evil

Drake with 30 shield/sec peak recharge but 65m sig radius ? HELL YEAH ! Where do I subscribe ?



You don't even understand your own idea? Good god. Rofls.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.08 06:46:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 08/07/2008 06:47:44

Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Why not just remove all overdrives and polycarb rigs?

Gee, I don't know... maybe because going SIGNIFICANTLY faster than base speed makes sense, but going INSANELY faster really, really doesn't ?
I mean, game-play wise. Because reality-wise, it makes no sense to have any top speed at all in the first place.

Also, because it doesn't make much sense for a BATTLESHIP to be able to completely evade drone and missile damage, and evade turret fire damage most of the time too.
And because it doesn't make any sense for CRUISERS to be able to easily go faster than FRIGATES.

The absolute top speed could easily be balanced against things like precision missile explosion velocity and falloff, drone MWD speed and so on - so that a ship without drone navigation rigs nor explosion velocity rigs couldn't really damage you, but one with could.
Also, you do get additional protection in form of sigradius reduction for speed above that treshold, so you still get turret fire protection, limited missile damage reduction and also slight drone damage reduction too.

However, you can no longer easily disengage, and you can no longer sweep free of any interdiction methods in larger boats.



So, yeah, that about covers it.
It doesn't make them useless, it just changes their scope a little bit.

Originally by: Vaal Erit
You don't even understand your own idea? Good god. Rofls.


Nah, it's just you who doesn't get the tradeoff offered, and how trying to apply that to other things would risk ending up making them overpowered instead of underpowered Twisted Evil
As for me realizing EXACTLY what my idea is, I guess the thread title should have been a dead giveaway already.

Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
Posted - 2008.07.08 07:02:00 - [7]
 

Mork&Mindy!

Bai ZongTong
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2008.07.08 07:03:00 - [8]
 

how about make velocity in the EVE engine stored as an unsigned 10-bit numerical variable?

this way, everytime you exceed 1023m/s, it resets you to zero =D

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.08 07:08:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Bai ZongTong
how about make velocity in the EVE engine stored as an unsigned 10-bit numerical variable?
this way, everytime you exceed 1023m/s, it resets you to zero =D

You mean 102.3 m/sec, I hope ? Laughing

Gojyu
Ever Flow
Axiom Empire
Posted - 2008.07.08 07:18:00 - [10]
 

I agree, though lets do it properly, lets give things a dps cap, and an ewar cap, where each ship can only mount 1 ewar mod, and it works every second time

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.08 07:25:00 - [11]
 

For the insane amount of nanowhines on the forum, I'm quite dissapointed at the overwhelmingly negative feedback.
So... wait... does this mean it's not much an anti-nano change, or too much of one ? Laughing

Hmm, I guess I must have hit the perfect balance, where the idea annoys BOTH sides of the argument Twisted Evil

Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
Posted - 2008.07.08 07:29:00 - [12]
 

Why not just implement 'special relativity'? Each ship has its own local value of c, an absolute speed limit, and as it approaches this speed (which it can never quite reach) its mass increases.

Roguehalo
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2008.07.08 07:34:00 - [13]
 

Once a game becomes so imbalanced that your enemy can engage you but you can't engage your enemy(go fight in Tama if you are not sure what I'm talking about) then the game just gets silly.

Eve is very silly at the moment Sad

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2008.07.08 07:44:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Nah, it's just you who doesn't get the tradeoff offered, and how trying to apply that to other things would risk ending up making them overpowered instead of underpowered



Ok I will go very slow for you, mrs. nano-whiner:

Originally by: Vaal Erit
What if ships would actually have an absolute max shield recharge attribute too, not just a base speed cap ?
Anything above that and it just reduces sigradius instead of going faster



This means that a drake would be capped at X shield hp per sec and anything OVER that would reduce the sigradius.

Originally by: Akita T
Drake with 30 shield/sec peak recharge but 65m sig radius ? HELL YEAH ! Where do I subscribe ?



No, 30 shield per second would not be over any limit so you would not lower the signature radius.

By your idea, a cap would be say 200 shield hp per second and anything over that would be wasted and turned into signature radius reduction.

Please actually read my post as well as YOUR OWN POSTS before forum whoring. No one likes dumb nano-whiners like you. Yeah, cruisers are areally going faster than frigates. God, go away please if you don't understand PvP game mechanics.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.08 07:54:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 08/07/2008 07:54:58
Originally by: Vaal Erit
Originally by: Akita T
Nah, it's just you who doesn't get the tradeoff offered, and how trying to apply that to other things would risk ending up making them overpowered instead of underpowered



Ok I will go very slow for you, mrs. nano-whiner:

Originally by: Vaal Erit
What if ships would actually have an absolute max shield recharge attribute too, not just a base speed cap ?
Anything above that and it just reduces sigradius instead of going faster



This means that a drake would be capped at X shield hp per sec and anything OVER that would reduce the sigradius.

Originally by: Akita T
Drake with 30 shield/sec peak recharge but 65m sig radius ? HELL YEAH ! Where do I subscribe ?



No, 30 shield per second would not be over any limit so you would not lower the signature radius.

By your idea, a cap would be say 200 shield hp per second and anything over that would be wasted and turned into signature radius reduction.

Please actually read my post as well as YOUR OWN POSTS before forum whoring. No one likes dumb nano-whiners like you. Yeah, cruisers are areally going faster than frigates. God, go away please if you don't understand PvP game mechanics.



If a cap of 200 shield HP per second would be introduced, MY usual Drake fit that only has a peak recharge of around 170 shield/sec wouldn't be affected AT ALL by any such cap, and therefore it really wouldn't matter.
If that was too hard to follow, I meant putting the cap at 30 shield/sec, thus decreasing my ship's sig radius proportional to how much higher my actual recharge was.

Follow me now, miss "no comprende" ?


As for frigates vs cruisers vs BSs, even CCP has repeatedly stated that they DON'T LIKE the situation, and WOULD LIKE a fair solution to that problem.

This is such a (remotely fair) solution.

Roguehalo
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2008.07.08 07:56:00 - [16]
 

One of the major problems of posting in these forums is that nobody actually takes the issue of balance seriously and thus instead of getting a serious debate you just get called a whiner.

I've now developed a very thick skin so if you don't like the stuff I post stop reading right now!!

ok we have FACTION WARFARE

hmm that's where you fight for your OWN faction right?

So when Caldari wonder how to counter the nano threat we get told we gotta go train Minmater

At this point in time Faction Warfare is a big joke and will remain so until CCP get serious about balance issues.

and no...........I AM NOT GOING TO TRAIN MINMATER SHIPS

NOT THIS WEEK

NOT NEXT WEEK

NOT NEXT MONTH

NOT FRIGGING EVER

I'm Caldari and if Caldari stuff aint good enough to fight Faction Warfare with then im outa FW

MacGrowler III
Northstar Cabal
Posted - 2008.07.08 08:04:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Roguehalo
I'm Caldari and if Caldari stuff aint good enough to fight Faction Warfare with then im outa FW


Evolve or die or whine !

Guess you choose the latter

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.08 08:16:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: MacGrowler III
Evolve or die or whine !
Guess you choose the latter

While the irony of whining about metawhining is not completely lost on me, guess what you picked too ?

Unless you have something CONSTRUCTIVE or CRITICAL to say about the ISSUE instead of the POSTERS, with al due respect (that is, not much), STFU !

MacGrowler III
Northstar Cabal
Posted - 2008.07.08 12:50:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Unless you have something CONSTRUCTIVE or CRITICAL to say about the ISSUE instead of the POSTERS, with al due respect (that is, not much), STFU !



Who died and made you a moderator Razz

And just who exactly said the other 3 races don't have an anti nano option ? I can think of several but maybe thats because I look at a problem and try and work out how I can overcome it rather than asking for game changes to be made for players of limited intellect, imagination or desire.

What exactly is a curse designed for other than stopping a vaga or other turret based nano ship dead in its tracks ?

Top base speed is how fast the ship flys, mods and skills influence this, just as they do tracking, tanking etc.

Following your argument to its logical conclusion, then all ships should perform uniformly regardless of skills and fits. This will provide that no player will have any advantage, and we can all live happily togeather sitting around a campfire singing sweet team building songs into the wee hours. Shocked

Jaketh Ivanes
Amarr
House of El
Posted - 2008.07.08 13:30:00 - [20]
 

Akita, wouldn't end result be the same? You have ships that you can't hit or damage enough. And if you can, they can still disengage the battle, as you don't have a ships that can catch them (they are out of web range Smile).

I think that your own speed should affect your own weapons, so if your speed is 9000 m/s, which would make a cruiser have a hell of a time hitting you, it should be equally hard for you to hit them. Ofcourse, missiles are not affected by your speed, but it's also hard to nano a Caldari ship and give Minmatarr a reason to use thier dual weapon systems (close and personal with extra DPS from the guns or far and safe with the low damage of missiles).

Meh, my idea has a few assumptions flaws, but someone might be able to build further on it.

Zarch AlDain
GK inc.
Posted - 2008.07.08 13:47:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
Akita, wouldn't end result be the same? You have ships that you can't hit or damage enough. And if you can, they can still disengage the battle, as you don't have a ships that can catch them (they are out of web range Smile).

I think that your own speed should affect your own weapons, so if your speed is 9000 m/s, which would make a cruiser have a hell of a time hitting you, it should be equally hard for you to hit them. Ofcourse, missiles are not affected by your speed, but it's also hard to nano a Caldari ship and give Minmatarr a reason to use thier dual weapon systems (close and personal with extra DPS from the guns or far and safe with the low damage of missiles).

Meh, my idea has a few assumptions flaws, but someone might be able to build further on it.


They are effected by your own speed. But you can manoeuvre around that with guns (tricky) or use drones and missiles (easy).

Zarch AlDain
GK inc.
Posted - 2008.07.08 13:55:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: MacGrowler III
Originally by: Akita T
Unless you have something CONSTRUCTIVE or CRITICAL to say about the ISSUE instead of the POSTERS, with al due respect (that is, not much), STFU !



Who died and made you a moderator Razz

And just who exactly said the other 3 races don't have an anti nano option ? I can think of several but maybe thats because I look at a problem and try and work out how I can overcome it rather than asking for game changes to be made for players of limited intellect, imagination or desire.

What exactly is a curse designed for other than stopping a vaga or other turret based nano ship dead in its tracks ?

Top base speed is how fast the ship flys, mods and skills influence this, just as they do tracking, tanking etc.

Following your argument to its logical conclusion, then all ships should perform uniformly regardless of skills and fits. This will provide that no player will have any advantage, and we can all live happily togeather sitting around a campfire singing sweet team building songs into the wee hours. Shocked


Your argument is weak. 'Taking things to their logical conclusion' never actually takes them to their logical conclusion. It takes them beyond the logical conclusion to some point of absurdity in order to make a "point" that is invalidated by its own absurdity.

I fly nano ships. I still think they are stupid and crap - the single worst balance point of eve at the moment. Even worse than capital ships online and POS bashing online. They are sort of fun, effective as hell, and unbalanced beyond belief.


Curse works well, battleships with heavy neuts are sort of ok, rapier works well. There are other options for gunships.

Funny thing is, none of the good options are Caldari. Most of my characters started as Caldari and they have all cross trained to the other race as fundamentally Caldari sucks for PvP as it currently is in eve - and one major reason for this is the nanocraze.

So please, give me a Caldari gang that can counter a nano gang. I don't mean just tank it till it gets bored and goes away, I mean properly fight and kill. Rather than bragging about how easy it is share some of these fine insights of yours.


I'm not sure this is the best solution - but its a solution and something is needed.

Matrixcvd
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.07.08 15:23:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Zarch AlDain

I fly nano ships. I still think they are stupid and crap - the single worst balance point of eve at the moment. Even worse than capital ships online and POS bashing online. They are sort of fun, effective as hell, and unbalanced beyond belief.




what? speed tanking is worse then lagging out, node crashing, uber pos warfare? sounds like a disgruntled employee cause that makes no sense. There is no balance issue with nano, you either know what you are doing or you don't, and actually i really cant stand the people who say they pwn with nanos but hate them, its utterly ridiculous

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.08 23:44:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Matrixcvd
speed tanking

Keyword "tanking". As in "reducing incoming damage to manageable levels". Not "completely avoiding all damage".

When you can have a ship that can outrun speed-boosted drones of the appropriate ship class, when you have a ship that can mostly outfly appropriate sized guided missiles (or in the case it doesn't outfly them due to headings, then at lreast reduce their damage to practically zero due to "explosion velocity falloff"), and when the same ship can also avoid (either via range or via out-tracking) practically all turret damage from just about any firing ship in an area, yeah, I'd really call that as "broken".

Given similar skill levels and similar metalevel of modules used, a battleship should never go faster than a cruiser, just like a cruiser should never go faster than a frigate.
Sure, a Minmatar or Angel battleship going as fast as a Caldari battlecruiser, now that I can easily live with - but significantly faster than any Caldari/Guristas cruiser, and we do have a problem.

Also, when you get for instance a Flycatcher with Precision Light missiles firing at a pimped interceptor, I want to see some damage. Not insta-kill, but at least SOME damage, dammit. But no, most of the times, the missiles can't even catch up in the first place, or if they do, they deal 0.0 damage.
Same for, say, an Eris with 75mm gattling Rails and a couple of tracking-boosting mods. If that can't even start scratching it, it's a problem.
Or hey, what about a droneboat with dual drone speed mods and Warrior IIs ? I'm sure there's even BATTLESHIPS that can go faster than that "fully pimped", which is just plain wrong.



So... speed tanking ? Yes please.
Speed damage immunity past a certain speed ? OH, HELL NO !
Since revamping the entire damage-dealing system to accomodate for this "issue" would me a major PITA, the simplest solution seems limiting the ships to some upper speed limit instead.
If the ship is below that speed level, fine, no problems... there's your speed tank - you still dictate range, you still can disengage most of the time and so on and so forth. Even with a full speed implant set plus a moderate speed fit and you may just barely reach the ship's "absolute top speed".
But if you reach a certain level where speed-tanking becomes ridiculously overpowered compared to... well... just about anything else... that's GOT to stop.

I even provided the extra potential speed with some advantages - yeah, you MAY only get up to 2 km/sec in that Machariel (heck, even that much seems a bit too much, but for the sake of argument let's say it's about right - a Berserker II with one drone nav mod goes slightly slower, with 2 nav mods slightly faster, so 2 km/sec seems like a good top speed for a Minnie battleship) - but if you try to go above that with faction/officer MWDs and gang link support and so an and so forth, sorry, you just CAN'T.
Heck, don't reduce signature radius for all I care. Make ship more agile for all I care instead. That's a huge advantage still (tighter orbit at same speed, ability for better tactical maneouvers, etc). Or make that some sigradius reduction (but capped at original sig radius) and some agility bonus too. Make that whatever the heck you think it would be fair, everything EXCEPT more raw speed.

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.09 05:30:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Joe Starbreaker on 09/07/2008 05:30:53
Why not just fit a heavy neut onto a battleship? Or tackle with an interceptor, or tank the hell out of them, or snipe? Use target painters, tracking disruptors, sensor dampers, ECM. Plenty of tactics work against nano-ships.

It seems you just want PVP to be like level 4 missions in your Raven... pick a target, press the "kill target" button, loot the wreck. A flat out competition to see who has more skillpoints and a better ship fitting. That's boring. Picking tactics based on what you expect your enemy's tactics to be FTW.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.09 11:26:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
Why not just fit a heavy neut onto a battleship? Or tackle with an interceptor, or tank the hell out of them, or snipe? Use target painters, tracking disruptors, sensor dampers, ECM. Plenty of tactics work against nano-ships.

It seems you just want PVP to be like level 4 missions in your Raven... pick a target, press the "kill target" button, loot the wreck. A flat out competition to see who has more skillpoints and a better ship fitting. That's boring. Picking tactics based on what you expect your enemy's tactics to be FTW.

Ok, let's see... Warp Disruptor II range, 28.8km overloaded solo, 32.1km non-overloaded with mindlinked commander in any ship. Neavy neut range, 25.2km, not extendable. Nano can just stay out of range. Pass.

Battleships and even cruisers might end up moving faster than most interceptors. Tackle with an interceptor when you both have about thsa same speed ? This means either fast suicide (running in a straigth line towards target) or plain old suicide (how long do you think you can manage to keep it scrambled ? because you won't web it anyway, or else YOU are in neut/web range too). Pass.

Tank the hell out of them ? Hmm... 100 nanofleet, 100 tankfleet. Focus fire from 100 nanos break just about any individual tank that's not under focused RR, focus fire from 100 tanked ships does squat to any of the nanoboats. Best case scenario, nobody gets killed, everybody gets bored, nanos disengage.

Sniping - yeah, good luck spreading your entire fleet far out enough to do you any good in actually hitting any nanoships. Also, watch how they simply warp off when they see you spread out like that and you start locking them.

Target painters - help with tracking the littlest bit, but not nearly enough for turrets to hit any of the really fast nanoboats. Missiles and drones remain useless. If they get painted hard enough for turrets to start dealing any significant amounts of damage, they can easily disengage and flee.

TD, RSD, ECM - at best, you force them away. Still doesn't help with dealing any damage.


As long as they can deal significant amounts of damage WITHOUT you getting a chance to significantly damage, let alone destroy any of them (assuming neither side makes any mistakes), you do have a problem.
As long as chances are even remotely even, it's all fine.
What we have now is NOT fine, not by a long shot.

Is there risk involved in flying nanoships ? YES, OF COURSE.
Can a really good nanofit ship be destroyed if the pilot makes no mistakes AFTER a random engagement starts and is even the least bit careful ? NOT REALLY.
And that's the only real problem.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.09 12:08:00 - [27]
 


Also, it's not like I'm asking for a total removal of speed-tanking or anything like that.
Most speed-tank fits go way below whatever "speed limits" would be enforced by this change, only already insanely expensive fits would suffer any significant "performance degradation".

Basically, something like battleship top speed around 2km/sec, battlecruisers around 3km/sec, cruisers 4km/sec, destroyers 6km/sec (lol) and frigates 8km/sec.
And when I say "around", I mean plus minus 20% or so depending on race, class and tier.
For instance, I have no problems with a 2300mps Panther, a 2150mps Vargur or Typhoon, but a Maelstrom should probably only get 1650mps tops or therabouts, while a Rokh more like 1600mps tops.

Goti Evans
Posted - 2008.07.09 16:05:00 - [28]
 

My personal View on the problem is that rather then capping or nerfing this should be delt with by boosting

There are two Grades of Warp Scrambler the Short range 2 pointer and the longer range 1 poniter. Why not add another grade or two for Webers?

Curently the Standerd model Weber reduces speed by 75% out to 10Km. If we add one that hits you for 50% at 20Km then you would need two of the moduals to be as effective as the short range. you can even go one step further 25% at 40Km you would effectivly have to have 5 moduals to drop the target to a little under one quarter of its speed. This should allow a little more fexibility for current ships to deal with fast moving targets.


Tobias Sjodin
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.07.09 16:46:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: Tobias Sjodin on 09/07/2008 16:46:48
Originally by: Akita T
[
Ok, let's see... Warp Disruptor II range, 28.8km overloaded solo, 32.1km non-overloaded with mindlinked commander in any ship. Neavy neut range, 25.2km, not extendable. Nano can just stay out of range. Pass.



And what harm does a nano ship out of range?


Quote:
focus fire from 100 tanked ships does squat to any of the nanoboats.


And the nanoships can do squat diddley doo out of range. And need to slow down to do any viable damage. Also, if you have 100 ships in your fleet and no rapier/arazu/curse/huginn then you fail.

Straight Chillen
Gallente
Solar Wind
Posted - 2008.07.09 17:35:00 - [30]
 

How about this. Why not making hardline stacking penalties. TBH there is nothing wrong with a interceptor with 3 OD II's and Poly carb II's doing 12k or so. Hell any speed fit ship with just mods and rigs isnt that skewed.

The huge game breaking speed only comes when a fleet has claymore running gang links, or the pilot has snakes in his head. Thats when speeds get ******ed. If stacking penalties were altered to the point where you could only get say, 5 bonuses, towards a particular stat.

What good will that do? simple example, A inty with 3x OD and 2x rigs is as fast as it could be, adding implants, or a gang link wont give you any more speed. I think this could be an AWESOME change. Of course the people with their stupid expensive implants are gonna get ****ed, but their missing the point, that they could just be using their implants for their speed bonus, and fit something else in the rigs and low slots.

This would trim down speeds significantly, increase variety in ship fits and tactics, and allow the super rich to still have their advantages.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only