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

Captator
Perditus Peregrinus
Posted - 2008.07.09 17:37:00 - [31]
 

How about approaching this from a different tack?

Instead of limiting top speed (which is overly artificial, though I am aware that base speed is too...), how about adding a SAFE speed limit, over which your ship starts taking damage: the more you are over this speed limit, the faster your ship takes damage (it would take it across shields then armor then hull, basis being the friction/matter waves/whatever generated by the velocity induce a force which wears down your ship.

Your numbers are in the ballpark I was imagining for these max safe speeds, (BS 1.5, BC 2.5, cruiser 3.5, dessy 4.5, frig 6.5) with a degree of variability similar to that which you suggested (although I would give minmatar a (70?)% potential increase, providing scope to make the tempest more useful, as it could then do nearly 3km/s safely if you choose to, and potentially function acording to minmatar doctrine as a skirmish vessel).

t2 and faction shipwise, all cruisers and smaller would have innate greater resistance to this damage, and so their upper speed limits would be modified up by 10-20% for non minmatar, and upto 30% for minmatar/angel and interceptors (eg: putting vaga upto near 5km/s safe top speed, which is about what it achieves now with 2 OD 2 poly fit).

NOTE: with this proposal you can still go 100km/s in a vaga if you so choose, but, Like overloading, you cannot do it for very long, otherwise you will blow up.

fake edit: This damage could instead be done perhaps via heat damage on modules (speed = more friction = more heat, go over design tolerance and damage is taken)

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.09 18:31:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Akita T
As long as [good pilots] can deal significant amounts of damage WITHOUT [their targets] getting a chance to significantly damage, let alone destroy any of them (assuming neither side makes any mistakes [other than being unprepared for the fight since before they undocked]), [the targets] do have a problem.

My corrections to your statement. It seems you think nanos are a problem because people unprepared to fight nanos can't fight nanos. To me, that's proof that nano is a tactic, not a broken mechanic. Tactics make the game more interesting.

If a fleet is prepared from the outset to defeat nano-ships, and they have the same amount of skillpoints/isk to invest as their aggressors do, they shouldn't have a problem. If the two fleets are equally matched in skillpoints and ISK, but one is caught unprepared for the tactics the other is using, then that sucks for them but it isn't a broken mechanic.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.09 23:28:00 - [33]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 09/07/2008 23:28:44
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
It seems you think nanos are a problem because people unprepared to fight nanos can't fight nanos.

Oh... Really ?

How about you list the ways one Caldari-only fleet can prepare itself to fight a fleet of 9+km/sec nano fleet. Or an Amarr-only fleet. Or, hell, a Gallente-only fleet for that matter.
Having a couple of Minmatar recons in your fleet (alongside some Gallente recons) is the only DECENT way to fight them.
HAVING to cross-train to another race just so you can decently counter a strategy that, in the end, ANY race can pull off (Caldari and Amarr a bit less so, but they still have a couple of "nano-able" ships each) is just poor design.
Good design is a rock-paper-scissors strategy ladder that doesn't rely on one or two specific ships, but instead on one or two specific CLASSES (regardless of race)

And, again, it's not like the devs like it either - they HAVE repeatedly stated that they don't like the fact larger ship classes can go faster than smaller ship classes, and they HAVE stated that they're looking for a fair way to fix that.
What do you know, this IS a fair way, and it DOES fix a lot of things, while NOT nerfing them completely into oblivion, only reducing them to respectable effectiveness levels.

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.10 01:06:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
It seems you think nanos are a problem because people unprepared to fight nanos can't fight nanos.

How about you list the ways one Caldari-only fleet can prepare itself to fight a fleet of 9+km/sec nano fleet.


1) Use ECM, so they can't shoot you.
2) Use well-tanked battleships with heavy neutralizers.
3) Use interceptors to tackle them, then have the main fleet shoot them.
4) Shoot them with sniper railgun ships spaced out at a considerable distance (so if the nanos get close to Sniper A, Sniper B can easily track them).
5) Bait them with a juicy Raven or Drake on a gate, with a bunch of webs in its mid slots and a good sized fleet on the other side of the gate.
6) Fit nano (e.g. Cerberi) and do it better than them.



Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.10 03:27:00 - [35]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 10/07/2008 03:39:41

Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
nanos are fine, plenty of counters exist

Mostly already covered in post #26.
Basically, it all comes down to the nano-pilots making mistakes or taking unnecessary risks as the only possiblity to KILL them once the engagement started.

It's as if you're trying to say "there's nothing wrong with 10+ km/sec battleships"... right ?
Well, WRONG.

CCP have repeatedly stated that they STILL see this ("the nano situation" - especially in larger sized ships) 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) or even this change presented right here.
Heck, some other possibilities not even mentioned so far exist.

It's not a matter of wether, but of when and what it gets "fixed".
This situation we have now WILL NOT persist.
Nobody except current nano (ab)users dare say "nanos are fine".

Taram Caldar
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Warped Aggression
Posted - 2008.07.10 05:02:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Edited by: Akita T on 09/07/2008 23:28:44
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
It seems you think nanos are a problem because people unprepared to fight nanos can't fight nanos.

Oh... Really ?

How about you list the ways one Caldari-only fleet can prepare itself to fight a fleet of 9+km/sec nano fleet. Or an Amarr-only fleet. Or, hell, a Gallente-only fleet for that matter.
Having a couple of Minmatar recons in your fleet (alongside some Gallente recons) is the only DECENT way to fight them.
HAVING to cross-train to another race just so you can decently counter a strategy that, in the end, ANY race can pull off (Caldari and Amarr a bit less so, but they still have a couple of "nano-able" ships each) is just poor design.
Good design is a rock-paper-scissors strategy ladder that doesn't rely on one or two specific ships, but instead on one or two specific CLASSES (regardless of race)

And, again, it's not like the devs like it either - they HAVE repeatedly stated that they don't like the fact larger ship classes can go faster than smaller ship classes, and they HAVE stated that they're looking for a fair way to fix that.
What do you know, this IS a fair way, and it DOES fix a lot of things, while NOT nerfing them completely into oblivion, only reducing them to respectable effectiveness levels.



1) Why would ANY proper corp/alliance fly an ONLY Caldari fleet???
2) Assuming your answer is "RP" I'll give you a list

- Falcon
- Rook
- Scorpion
- Kitsune
- Crow w/webber
- Raptor w/webber
- BS w/Heavy Neuts
- Cerbs w/ Assault Launchers and Missile Velocity rigs.
- Eagles w/tracking mods rather than sniper fits.
- Vultures (same)
- Faction Webbers
- NOsprey w/webbers

And, tbh, there are very few 'larger' ship classes that can go faster than smaller ones anymore. Nanoships have been pretty balanced. There are a FEW notable exceptions to that list but nano'ing anything bigger than a cruiser renders it pretty useless for anything but bumping, tbh.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.10 05:25:00 - [37]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 10/07/2008 05:28:19
Originally by: Taram Caldar
1) Why would ANY proper corp/alliance fly an ONLY Caldari fleet???
2) Assuming your answer is "RP"

Was mostly talking about FW, but meh... close enough.

Quote:
Falcon / Rook / Scorpion / Kitsune

ECM boats -> kill them if feasable (can't jam the entire enemy nanofleet), or simply disengage otherwise
Quote:
Crow w/webber, Raptor w/webber

Both die laughably fast when chasing after a nanoboat that has roughly the same velocity they have - they don't even get in web range before they die.
Quote:
BS w/Heavy Neuts

You can get nano-ships interdicting Neut-BSs outside neut range or simply avoiding them after the very first neut blast at weird range.
Quote:
Cerbs w/ Assault Launchers and Missile Velocity rigs.

Even considering an absurd dual-T2-expvelo rig fit, the implant and precision lights, you get a 6.8kmps explosion velocity (with 1.5km explosion falloff). Much more realistic would be something below 6kmps explosion velocity.
Any 9+kmps nano practically takes no damage even from that, and there are BATTLESHIPS that can go that fast.
Quote:
Eagles w/tracking mods rather than sniper fits. Vultures (same)

Like I said - snipers in a wide pattern ? Nanos just bail out (because they can, easily).
Quote:
Faction Webbers

Lower range compared to heavy neuts. Just TOUCHING a nanoship at near full speed with a web will do you no good - it can just GLIDE out of web range then avoid you afterwards. Or disengage.
Quote:
NOsprey w/webbers

So.. bait, eh ? Not much use in an actual fleet battle.


We're back to the "nano pilot MUST make a mistake or take an unnecessary risk" in order to get destroyed.
Which is, simply put, bull****.


Quote:
And, tbh, there are very few 'larger' ship classes that can go faster than smaller ones anymore. Nanoships have been pretty balanced. There are a FEW notable exceptions to that list but nano'ing anything bigger than a cruiser renders it pretty useless for anything but bumping, tbh.

AGAIN, when talking "nano-ship", I don't mean a reasonable-speed ship (like 8kmps frigs, 4kmps cruisers or 2kmps BSs - THOSE ARE JUST FINE)... I mean stuff like 12++kmps 'ceptors, 8+kmps cruisers, 4+kmps battleships and so on.
Give it enough "faction uberpimping" combined with snakes, a bit of fleet support and just about any ship can go much faster than anybody could reasonably expect.


Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.10 07:07:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Quote:
Eagles w/tracking mods rather than sniper fits. Vultures (same)

Like I said - snipers in a wide pattern ? Nanos just bail out (because they can, easily).

Enemy runs away == you win. No?

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.10 07:09:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Give it enough "faction uberpimping" combined with snakes, a bit of fleet support and just about any ship can go much faster than anybody could reasonably expect.

I would like to think that if I spend a few billion on a cruiser or something, it might be just a liiiittle bit unbalanced in my favor. No?

Taram Caldar
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Warped Aggression
Posted - 2008.07.10 07:18:00 - [40]
 

Ok, first of all there are plenty of ships out there to neutralize/kill nanoships with. Granted there are better specialized ones than the caldari but the bottom line is there ARE tools in the box even for a caldari only fleet.

Falcon/Rook/Scorp/Blackbird/Kitsune can neutralize up to 3 enemy nano ships. So WHAT if they can kill them. The point is they've been neutralized. They either dissengage or die. Combine a jammed nano-ship with a 20kps crow and you have a dead nanoship. It's not my fault that your crow pilots can't fit a proper interceptor capable of tackling a nano cruiser. Bottom line is that properly fitted, with similar expenses a Crow can tackle any nanoship out there. And you totally missed the NOSPREY as it too is perfectly capable of being nanod up to speeds rivaling a vagabond.

Nano gangs cannot take on a proper gang that works together, period. If they come in with 'normal' support ships you jam out the nanos and blow up their support. then the nanos have to dissengage or slowly get picked apart. It's been done time and time again. Nanogangs are only truely effective against a dissorganized opponent who allows themselves to get strung out and separated, thus letting the nano gang pounce on the stragglers before the fleet can get back to them.

Stay together, use EWAR and your own nanoships to get warp-ins on THEIR strays and you can kill them, easily. Just because you haven't yet learned how to counter nano ships does not mean it cannot be done.

And as has already been pointed out: If someone spends a few BILLION isk (and that's what you are talking about) their ship is going to be significantly harder to kill than your average day to day ship. This is true for tanked ships as well. If I faction fit a tank on a battleship and invest in the best tanking implants as well you are going to have one hell of a hard time killing me before I kill you and your friends. It's just a simple fact.

Fact of the matter is that nanoships have already been balanced several times and those who are used to dealing with them are quite capable of doing so. Nano gangs aren't the huge threat they once were, and haven't been for quite some time. As long as you use the tools you've been given to deal with them. Implementing bizarre measures like what you're suggesting is ridiculous. I could see adjusting the stacking penalties a bit more but slapping a hard and fast speed cap? No, that makes no sense.

Miyamoto Uroki
Caldari
Sarum Industries
Posted - 2008.07.10 07:31:00 - [41]
 

I agree with the op. Insane speeds are not good for the gameplay.

/signed

Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
Posted - 2008.07.10 08:14:00 - [42]
 

make maneuvering have a cap.

I mean you have a certain momentum (mass*speed) and you maneuvering thrusters need to overcome this to change your direction. Make this based on propulsion strength and agility. This will result in a certain top speed were you are still able to orbit, however past that you are not able to turn a circle, and at past another threshold, you won't be able to change direction.

Or hull integrity threshold would be another limiter. Once you pass a certain speed limit, your hull starts to break, resulting in some hp/sec loss in hull/armor.

I know that speed control is not much good in eve (not able to set a speed limit for engines) and the above proposals would complicate things.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.10 09:40:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
Originally by: Akita T
Give it enough "faction uberpimping" combined with snakes, a bit of fleet support and just about any ship can go much faster than anybody could reasonably expect.

I would like to think that if I spend a few billion on a cruiser or something, it might be just a liiiittle bit unbalanced in my favor. No?

No. ISK spending shouldn't have anything to do with it. Besides, you don't even NEED insane spending - T2 fit, polycarbons, a couple of overdrives and a Claymore in your gang - you're already reaching near-unreasonable speeds.
The really expensive fits plus snakes reach GAME-BREAKING speeds.

Originally by: Taram Caldar
Fact of the matter is that nanoships have already been balanced several times and those who are used to dealing with them are quite capable of doing so. Nano gangs aren't the huge threat they once were, and haven't been for quite some time.

I take it you haven't been watching the FW events much lately ? Or for that matter many other events recently ?


Originally by: Taram Caldar
Ok, first of all there are plenty of ships out there to neutralize/kill nanoships with. Granted there are better specialized ones than the caldari but the bottom line is there ARE tools in the box even for a caldari only fleet.
[...]
Nano gangs cannot take on a proper gang that works together, period.
[...]
And as has already been pointed out: If someone spends a few BILLION isk (and that's what you are talking about) their ship is going to be significantly harder to kill than your average day to day ship. This is true for tanked ships as well. If I faction fit a tank on a battleship and invest in the best tanking implants as well you are going to have one hell of a hard time killing me before I kill you and your friends. It's just a simple fact.


You know, somebody else already said it better in another thread :

Originally by: Shadowsword
On one hand you have a load of ships that can be strong in one or to aspects, but if the opposition hit any single weakness, they're toast. Examples: plated abaddon getting jammed, falcon finding an opponent with one or two ECCM and not enough racial ECM against it, etc. Interceptors tackled by a huginn, etc. If those ships get in that situation while inside warp disruptor range, they...just...die... It's as it should be.

But on the other hand, nano ships. They DO have weaknesses, but how many of them means death?

- Light drones just don't cut it when they have to chew through 9k shield, with 50% average resists. It would take something like 5 minutes for them to kill a nano ship.

- Heavy neuts are easily countered by cap boosters, at least long enough for the nano pilot to get out of disruptor range and warp away.

- high-tracking guns: more dps than light drones, but you're still not going to hold down a nano to kill it.

- Electronic warfare will prevent it from killing you, maybe, but it sure as hell won't allow you to kill it, either.
And half the nano-ships are recons, which are hardened against electronic warfare.

- Numbers: So, to counter the so-called blob counter, you need to blob more. Riiight...

- Huginns/rapiers: The only real weakness of nano-ships, who CAN kill them, but guess what? They're nanoed, too.

Btw, D00m is well known for it's nano gangs since a long time, yet their killboard record only 15 HAS and 16 Recons losses. What does that tell you?

Nerfing speed tanking to bring it back to a level every game mechanic can cope with proprely doesn't mean removing it entirely. Interceptors were doing "only" 4-5km/sec two years ago, that didn't prevent them from doing their jobs.


There you go.

Matrixcvd
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.07.10 12:35:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Akita T
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.

IBLAHAHAHALBHAHAHALBHALLA blah and moar blah


you suck at PVP, c/d? it gets to this point and today i am just not as nice at breaking the news to nanowhiners

who the f&ck cares if a ship can out run drones? the purpose is to either catch the ship, stop the ship from going that fast in either webbing it or capping it out, or preventing the ship from shooting.

what you should be doing instead of writing diatribes on the nanowhine is ask yourself, "matrixcvd, why do i think i should be able to F1,F2,F3 etc and do full damage no matter what I am doing?"

ask yourself that question a few times and then you will see all the posibilities in this game just open up

Matrixcvd
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.07.10 12:39:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Akita T

HAVING to cross-train to another race just so you can decently counter a strategy that, in the end, ANY race can pull off (Caldari and Amarr a bit less so, but they still have a couple of "nano-able" ships each) is just poor design.


did you train learning V? cause if you didnt it would really help you in RL to figure out this whole PVP thing the xtraining excuse is about as stupid as you can get, bottom of the barrel when you're 6 feet under in stuff you have no clue about.

there are 4 races for a reason and you cant do everything sitting in your drake so you come on here and ***** and complain to get things your way? last time i checked there were no burger kings in EVE, and you cant do everything with a BC

Sonya Rayner
Fairlight Corp
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2008.07.10 13:14:00 - [46]
 

Edited by: Sonya Rayner on 10/07/2008 13:16:27
In my opinion, a way to fix the nano problem which does not impact other gameplay styles much:

Fix the formula for the MWD to the state it was before last propulsion modules' change, i.e. make it capped by module's "Max speed boost" property, this would effectively limit max speed for nanos while leaving max speed for heavy ships (which use mwd not to speed tank but to quickly get in range f.ex.) intact. Now the lighter your ship is, the faster it goes, with no limit. This way nanos would make your ship go faster if it's below limiter for module, and would do nothing except for some agility increase when your speed boost has hit the cap. That would slow things a bit (except those ships, which are dedicated to fly fast, they have high base velocities - inties, interdictors, vagabonds).

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.10 13:43:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Matrixcvd
Originally by: Akita T
HAVING to cross-train to another race just so you can decently counter a strategy that, in the end, ANY race can pull off (Caldari and Amarr a bit less so, but they still have a couple of "nano-able" ships each) is just poor design.

did you train learning V? cause if you didnt it would really help you in RL to figure out this whole PVP thing the xtraining excuse is about as stupid as you can get, bottom of the barrel when you're 6 feet under in stuff you have no clue about.
there are 4 races for a reason and you cant do everything sitting in your drake so you come on here and ***** and complain to get things your way? last time i checked there were no burger kings in EVE, and you cant do everything with a BC

1. Learn to read.
2. Realize I have already cross-trained and CAN fly Minnie Recons
3. STFU already and re-read the whole damned thread first before spouting more crap.

It's about BALANCE in REGULAR pilots in REGULAR fleets, but in particular, for same-race fleets typical in FW.
Not about "oh my 200 zillion ISK ship is unstoppable" or "but I can counter with my two alts worth 100 zillion ISK each so you lose".
There are plenty of reasons, ROLEPLAY OR OTHERWISE to NOT EVER CROSSTRAIN in EVE.
Plenty of reasons to crosstrain too, but once crosstraining becomes nearly mandatory to even stand a sliver of a chance, that's game balance breaking.

But I'm sure such a tough concept would be a bit too hard to comprehend for somebody that can't be bothered to even try to write proper English and resorts to ad-hominem attacks that backfire (at least now I'm using a justified ad hominem attack).

Matrixcvd
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.07.10 14:34:00 - [48]
 

Edited by: Matrixcvd on 10/07/2008 14:34:56
Originally by: Akita T

It's about BALANCE in REGULAR pilots in REGULAR fleets, but in particular, for same-race fleets typical in FW.



40 drakes, 20 caracals, a heron and BB thrown in for lulz is not a balanced fleet. And there are no regular pilots in EVE, there are just dumb ones and ones that PVP. Thats it. I could give 2 craps about FW, thats why this nano whine has gotten to the level it has because of morons thinkin they can get their PVP on and fail hard

A balanced fleet has EWAR+Logistics+Range Damage+Speed+Cap warfare+WEB/Tackle. You want that in bold for clarity? Balance doesn't start with the name, its a concept beyond your comprehension it seems.

Originally by: Akita T

But I'm sure such a tough concept would be a bit too hard to comprehend for somebody that can't be bothered to even try to write proper English and resorts to ad-hominem attacks that backfire (at least now I'm using a justified ad hominem attack).



so by putting it in bold was that to confuse me? cause i read what you wrote, threw up in my shoe and tried to figure out how ridiculous you are.

I trained Propulsion Jamming V cause i needed something, i trained Minmitar to slow stuff down, i trained ECM to stop people from shooting, your caldari fan boi luv role play should not be an excuse for stupidity nor should it be justification for changing 1 style of PVP.

btw
ad hominen, is that like a part of a pelvus or somethin? i get that alot from Super Drake allstar pilots cryin boo hoo over their missles hitting for 0.0


Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.10 16:31:00 - [49]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 10/07/2008 16:36:03
Originally by: Matrixcvd
I trained Propulsion Jamming V cause i needed something, i trained Minmitar to slow stuff down, i trained ECM to stop people from shooting

My, what a coincidence, GUESS WHAT SKILLS I HAVE ALSO ?!?

Quote:
caldari fan boi[...]ad hominen, is that like a part of a pelvus or somethin?

Shocked

Just because I am Caldari and I prefer to fly Caldari boats IN MISSIONS doesn't mean I know jack**** about other races' ships or about, er... well, anything else than missiles. Quite the contrary, actually, seems like I know a lot more than you do about more things than you could have imagined.

But yeah, "pelvus or somethin"...
Rolling Eyes

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.10 16:38:00 - [50]
 

What seems to bother you most is the idea that you can beat the nanos but you can't kill them. I agree that killmails are happy events, but not being able to catch a ship specifically fit for escape isn't really something to reprogram the game over.

The great thing about nano fitting is, you can do it, too. It should be easy for such an expert PVP'er as yourself with Minmatar Cruiser V.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.10 23:42:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
What seems to bother you most is the idea that you can beat the nanos but you can't kill them [...] not being able to catch a ship specifically fit for escape isn't really something to reprogram the game over.

And see, here's the problem - you say "ship specifically fit for ESCAPE". Wrong. You're fit for SPEED TANK.
The escaping thingy is just an accidental (and mostly unwanted) bonus, especially for larger ship classes.
Do I really have to drive the "hey, moron, remember WHY they nerfed WCSs in the first place" point all over again into your skull ? I hope not. But I will if I have to.

So... why does speed-tanking also automatically have to mean you get to ESCAPE too if you wanted to ?
I mean, I don't see shield, armour nor hull tanking as being able to escape, and "ECM tanking" could only escape from a very, very limited number of enemies... yet for some reason, this "speed tank thingy" (PAST A CERTAIN SPEED TRESHOLD) means you get to escape from almost any number of enemies that do not contain a pair of very specific ships (a pair of one Minnie and one Gallente recon).

Now, sure, SOME ship classes (frigates, covops, even maybe destroyers) deserve to have a realtively easy time disengaging larger craft... but when battleships can (even if only theoretically) disengage regular frigate tacklers... oh, boy, do we have a problem.

Esmenet
Gallente
Posted - 2008.07.11 00:30:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Taram Caldar

Nano gangs cannot take on a proper gang that works together, period. If they come in with 'normal' support ships you jam out the nanos and blow up their support. then the nanos have to dissengage or slowly get picked apart. It's been done time and time again. Nanogangs are only truely effective against a dissorganized opponent who allows themselves to get strung out and separated, thus letting the nano gang pounce on the stragglers before the fleet can get back to them.



The simple truth of nanowhiners.

Taram Caldar
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Warped Aggression
Posted - 2008.07.11 01:17:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Akita T

Btw, D00m is well known for it's nano gangs since a long time, yet their killboard record only 15 HAS and 16 Recons losses. What does that tell you?



Guess what... I've fought against DOOm and the whole rest of Tri before. I've fought PL (who also love to nano). I've flown with and against the best nano pilots in the game. Hell I can nano pretty well myself when I feel the urge, though I prefer more 'normal' speeds myself :)

Wanna know why DOOm doesn't have many dead nanoships? Because they know their limitations and the minute a fleet that can assjam them starts forming they GTFOOD. Bottom line: You can counter nano's just fine. Just because you don't LIKE them doesn't mean they aren't a valid method of playing the game.

Back when it was COMMON for nanoships to break 20k/s yeah they were broken. But now? That's HARDLY common... most 'nano' ships today don't break 15k, let alone 20, and that's only if they're rigged and have snakes. Oh.. btw... you're playing "Faction Warfare" which means the enemy won't be all that concerned and WILL use snakes. Why? Because there's no risk of losing your pod in lowsec if you have half a brain. No bubbles = pod will always get away if the pilot has half a clue. So you probably are seeing the faster end of the spectrum, nano-wise.

But hey it's not our fault you can't play with the big kids in 0.0. Bottom line is that nano ships, even in lowsec, are stop-able. Hell there are 6 webber ships out there that can more than handle them and, like in 0.0, they're common as **** in lowsec because the risk of losing them is lower. And if you can't be arsed to fly them then fly jammers and just neutralize the nano***s because they have no means of stopping you from doing that. Then if they're stupid enough to stick around tackle t hem with inties (caldari have the fastest intie in the game FFS) and blow their asses to shreds while they sit there going "WTF Why Can't I Shoot Back???".

Bottom line:
Your ineptitude at PVP doesn't mean that an entire ship class needs to be nerfed. Hell, I don't even like to fly Nanos, I prefer to kill them. But you don't see me whining that they need to be slowed down.

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.11 04:37:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
What seems to bother you most is the idea that you can beat the nanos but you can't kill them [...] not being able to catch a ship specifically fit for escape isn't really something to reprogram the game over.

And see, here's the problem - you say "ship specifically fit for ESCAPE". Wrong. You're fit for SPEED TANK.
The escaping thingy is just an accidental (and mostly unwanted) bonus, especially for larger ship classes.

So, your beef with nanoships is that you think they're not doing what their pilots want them to do? I don't think the ability of speed-fit ships to escape an engagement is accidental or unwanted. Pilots often set up their ships and choose their orbit distance, etc., specifically thinking about being able to disengage. Just yesterday I fit out a Stabber and set my orbit distance at 11km -- not a coincidence that this is 1km outside web range! When things got hairy, I was able to warp to a safespot and wait out my GCC. My fittings were a success!

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.11 04:41:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Taram Caldar
Oh.. btw... you're playing "Faction Warfare" which means the enemy won't be all that concerned and WILL use snakes. Why? Because there's no risk of losing your pod in lowsec if you have half a brain.

Taram, I totally agree with everything else you've said in the thread, but just want to correct you on this one thing here. I've spent most of my play time in lowsec and in seven months I never lost a pod, but I lost two in two days in Factional Warfare. They are breaking all kinds of new records for lag and latency, is why.

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.11 04:44:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Akita T
So... why does speed-tanking also automatically have to mean you get to ESCAPE too if you wanted to ?
I mean, I don't see shield, armour nor hull tanking as being able to escape

Uh, hmm, "speed tank"? You know that's just kind of a popular phrase, right? It's a term people use to refer to a ship that uses speed and angular velocity to avoid taking damage. It doesn't mean that speed is an actual "tank" with hit points like shield, armor, and hull have. There's no reason speed has to behave like shield, armor, or hull just because some people like to informally call a certain tactic by a certain phrase...

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.11 05:35:00 - [57]
 

Joe : if this would have been RealLife™, you would have had a sliver of a point about your last remark (the "speed tank" one).
Since EVE isn't real-life, and the main focus is GAMEPLAY balance, yes, for all intents and purposes a "speed tank" *IS* a proper form of tank, and it's not supposed to help you avoid ALL damage, just REDUCE the incoming damage to manageable levels.
Once it manages to reduce incoming damage from most incoming sources (especially those of same size) to zero, the gameplay's broken.
LONG BEFORE that, it's fine. AFTER that, it's broken. The only problem is finding out the exact limitation between "just fine" and "broken".

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.11 06:53:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Joe : if this would have been RealLife™, you would have had a sliver of a point about your last remark (the "speed tank" one).
Since EVE isn't real-life, and the main focus is GAMEPLAY balance, yes, for all intents and purposes a "speed tank" *IS* a proper form of tank

Sez you. I say speed is speed, and tank is tank. Speed doesn't have to obey the laws of tank. They are different. Tanking is countered with DPS, and speed is countered with smart management of tracking and tackling. You not being able knowing how to kill a billion-isk Vagabond with your vanilla Drake isn't indicative of a broken game.

Hun Jakuza
We Are So Troubled Everyone Runs Screaming
Posted - 2008.07.11 07:04:00 - [59]
 

Another Caldari who crying for speed nerf.
Pls cry for more ECM boost and any caldari boost too.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.11 15:51:00 - [60]
 


Let me put it another way so maybe even you will be able to understand it...

1. How much does having a mindlinked Vulture (in a shield-tanked gang) or a mindlinked Damnation (in an armor-tanked gang) increase the gang's survivability ? How about a mindlinked Claymore in a speed-fit gang, how much does that increase the gang's survivability in comparison ?

2. Crystal or Slave implants, how much do they increase your survivability ? What about Snake implants in comparison ?

3. Overloading shield boosters or armor repairers, how much do they increase your survivability ? What about overloading a MWD in comparison ?

4. Put together all of the above. A Slave-implanted, mindlinked Damnation, repairer-overloaded gang... compared to a snake-implanted, mindlinked Claymore, MWD-overloaded gang... comparatively, which one is more survivable, and by how much ?


And let me also give you a little hint : in all of the above, the "speed" option has a disproportionately higher survivability rate compared to any of the other options.
And I mean "almost no chance to die" against "dies a bit later" kind of disproportionate.

So, yeah, let's for a second ASSUME that what you said is true and "nano-fits are fine".
Well then, it appears that everything else is **** then, and in a dire need of a huge buff Rolling Eyes


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