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

Immersive
Immersive Technology Solutions
Posted - 2008.07.16 11:58:00 - [91]
 

Of this thread, I have seen maybe 3 constructive posts from the pro-nano crowd.
It's disappointing.

Anyways, how about we get rid of individual speed caps altogether.

Make every ships max speed at 20,000m/s and just tweak their acceleration.

AB increases thrust and lowers agility = accelerates faster but turns slower.
MWD increases thrust dramaticly and lowers agility = accelerates faster but turns slower.
Nano's reduce mass, increasing acceleration and maneuvering.
OD's increase thrust, increasing acceleration.
iStabs increase agility, increasing maneuvering.

This way, everyone can travel fast, and will still allow the smaller ships to catch the larger ships.
The game mechanics are already in place, just requires attributes to be changed.

Also:
FIX Heavy Precision Missiles. The explosion velocity is wrong.
BOOST Torpedos. Heavy Assault Missiles have the same range.
BOOST Missiles in general. Missiles travel faster than their explosions...

Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Biotronics Inc.
Initiative Mercenaries
Posted - 2008.07.16 13:38:00 - [92]
 

Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 16/07/2008 13:57:19
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
Edited by: Joe Starbreaker on 16/07/2008 01:29:53
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
As for the topic: The devs should decide how they envisioned the EVE game mechanics. Then they should take the appropriate steps to ensure it.
I myself will welcome and deal with it, because I value balance more than my precious e-peen.

The devs have created the game mechanics.
With these mechanics, ships can be made to go really really fast.
I suggest you welcome and deal with it!
Yeah, and they've already stated that they kinda dislike the current state of speed and capital ships.
Your point?
Thank you for telling me what the devs want. However, I still hold the deluded belief that the best way to figure what the devs wanted to build is to look at what they built.

The devs have built a game in which ships can go quite fast if they are fit very expensively for speed. Thus it seems to me that the devs did not want a game where speed is impossible and irrelevant. You claim to want to accept what the devs give you. So, accept it.
So you choose to believe what you like to believe and ignore what the devs have actually said? Well I guess it's no use arguing against such an amount of ignorance.
Nevertheless, just let me rephrase so even you can understand what I was saying:
I will welcome and accept any change the devs are going to make with regard to the whole speed issue.
I will also welcome and adopt any official statement about how they envision speed/tracking/missile/etc. game mechanics.

Last but not least, some friendly advice: you shouldn't go around telling people what to do and trying to spin their words around. That makes you look like an arrogant ass-hat, and I'm sure you don't want to look like an arrogant ass-hat, do you? Wink

Natheniel
Gallente
Dark-Rising
IT Alliance
Posted - 2008.07.16 16:35:00 - [93]
 

alright i got about half way into this thread before i had to post this. 90% of the time i see people on these threads who call others nanowhiners and spew cheep insults, why do they do this one might ask? id say its because they are so scared to loose their uber nano ship that they have to attack others over it, "noo dont take away my ability to pwn noobs and escape with out fear of being tackled! i dont have the balls to use a tanked ship and actally RISK it!" that is basicly all im seeing here from those who constantly attack people trying to offer solutions that CCP WANTS! yes thats right, ccp wants to take away your nano boats so maybe you should flame ccp before you flame the people who offer ccp the solutions. and show some guts grow up and use the big boy ships

DevilDogUSMC
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2008.07.16 16:49:00 - [94]
 

Well... ummm

1. NOS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2. Dont fly alone.

3. Dont give prirates more of a reason to nano out an find you.

4. If you find yourself locked down 4 km from the gate with no hope of escape. Remember what you did to get you there in the first place and dont do it again.

5. If All else fails just know that CCP fixes their stuff when they feel like it. thats the way its been for 5 years now an it wont change LOL


Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.16 18:26:00 - [95]
 

Edited by: Joe Starbreaker on 16/07/2008 18:29:28
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
So you choose to believe what you like to believe and ignore what the devs have actually designed and built? Well I guess it's no use arguing against such an amount of ignorance.
Fixed for you...

Originally by: Natheniel
alright i got about half way into this thread before i had to post this... i dont have the balls to use a tanked ship and actally RISK it!" that is basicly all im seeing here from those who constantly attack people trying to offer solutions that CCP WANTS! yes thats right, ccp wants to take away your nano boats so maybe you should flame ccp
You nanowhiners must have some magical portal into the minds of CCP that the rest of us cannot access. CCP built the game EVE-online and can modify it at any time they like. What CCP wants is what we've got.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.17 00:37:00 - [96]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 17/07/2008 00:39:19
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
You nanowhiners must have some magical portal into the minds of CCP that the rest of us cannot access.

People generally like to call them by the less-magical, more-technical terms of "statements", "posts" and "blogs", actually.

Preemptive edit : no, I will not do the legwork AGAIN.
You search for them yourself. They exist, are plenty actually, so you should eventually find some of them.

Immersive
Immersive Technology Solutions
Posted - 2008.07.17 06:44:00 - [97]
 

Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
What CCP wants is what we've got.

Joe, enough with the naivete please.
No one, ever, has built a system, software or otherwise, exactly to their wishes on the first attempt.
What we have now is a product of their intentions, but it is not necessarily a complete encapsulation.

Nano, as it stands, is a problem and needs to be reviewed.
The Dev's watch the boards for ideas, so please provide some instead of the continuing personal attacks.
I have still not seen an effective (ie: Fatal) countermeasure to the nanos that does not require another nano ship, and we are on page 4 already.

Natheniel
Gallente
Dark-Rising
IT Alliance
Posted - 2008.07.17 13:43:00 - [98]
 

Originally by: Natheniel
alright i got about half way into this thread before i had to post this... i dont have the balls to use a tanked ship and actally RISK it!" that is basicly all im seeing here from those who constantly attack people trying to offer solutions that CCP WANTS! yes thats right, ccp wants to take away your nano boats so maybe you should flame ccp
You nanowhiners must have some magical portal into the minds of CCP that the rest of us cannot access. CCP built the game EVE-online and can modify it at any time they like. What CCP wants is what we've got.


yes the magical portal called the dev blog, try reading them some time

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.17 15:04:00 - [99]
 

Originally by: Immersive
Joe, enough with the naivete please.

Hey guys, read some of your own posts. "The devs agree with me" isn't an argument, especially when the most obvious evidence of the devs intentions (=dev actions) is in direct oppostion to your schemes. CCP has a lot of employees, and just because one of them somewhere said something to shut up the whiners doesn't mean that The Devs are out to nerf speed.

Here's what you need to do:
1. Find a reason why speed is bad.
2. Propose a solution.

So far you're trying and trying at #2, but haven't even satisfactorily argued point #1. If the only argument you have against speed is that a hypothetical fleet composed entirely of Caracals or something can't beat fast ships, your argument fails. A number of low-cost counters to speed have been mentioned -- neutralizers, webs, interceptors, sniping, etc -- and if the only complaint is that a billion-isk HAC might have a chance of escaping when these cheap T1 counters are used, you haven't convinced anyone.

Euriti
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.07.17 16:19:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Originally by: Euriti
Edited by: Euriti on 13/07/2008 11:08:05
Edited by: Euriti on 13/07/2008 11:05:21
Edited by: Euriti on 13/07/2008 11:01:39
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".



I'll redirect you to my alt posts:

http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=806494&page=1#25

http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=806494&page=3#73

At the same time all nanos but Sac and Ishtar have to slow down to hit anything. The ishtars drones can be destroyed and the sac has a max range of 20km unless you decide to fit heavy missiles. Now throw 1 good timed heavy neut on them (aka between mwd cycles.) and they're sitting ducks.

The sheer amount of bad facts displayed on the 1st page just tells me that this is another pointless whine with facts that are not true.

You are saying cruisers are faster than ceptors. This is wrong unless you decide to not speedfit your ceptor while snakeing your vagabond.

You are also saying "9km/s". This is totally unrealistic, no one EVER goes that fast, there's no point, you hit nothing, you can not keep a steady orbit. Totally, utterly pointless and totally utterly ****.

You wanna put a cap on speed, that's fine, but you are setting it unreasonably low (3.5-4km). That is the speeds where you are getting buttrapped by every single medium turret and this would serve only to nerf the vagabond. 5km/s is more reasonable if a cap is to be introduced but pidgeonholeing things as these and trying to keep people within boundaries in what is a sandbox game in fundamentally wrong.


I love these kind of posts.

Nobody is talking about the DPS you can effectively apply at your max speed. That is highly irrelevant. The topic is about mitigating/avoiding damage that is beyond any other tanking method. Speed tanks are far superior in that regard.

You can still slow down to apply your damage, just when things start to look unfavorable, you just accelerate to your full potential and there is almost no way to stop you from escaping. And the existing options are highly specific to 2 ships (huginn and rapier).


Wow, complete lack of reading comprehension. These graphs show how much dps done to nanoships going 4k and 5.5k respectively, not how much they do.

Jesus.

Also, invincible nano is invincible: https://www.pandemic-legion.com/killboard/view_kill.php?id=116571

Adaera
Posted - 2008.07.17 19:09:00 - [101]
 

I think this is a good idea personally.
Balance issues aside - does nobody see anything just a tiny bit wrong with cruisers and battleships outrunning frigates? =/

Euriti
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.07.17 22:02:00 - [102]
 

Originally by: Adaera
I think this is a good idea personally.
Balance issues aside - does nobody see anything just a tiny bit wrong with cruisers and battleships outrunning frigates? =/


Why do I bother discussing with deluded people?

Battleships outrunning frigs? Well possible with an officer mach with overload, hg slaves and a max skilled claymore.

Cruisers, possible if you pour ****loads of isk in to it.

Normally, nop, my Ares goes 7k without implants and simple t2.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.17 23:02:00 - [103]
 

Quote:
Why do I bother discussing with deluded people?

I could probably ask the same thing myself.
Quote:
Wow, complete lack of reading comprehension. These graphs show how much dps done to nanoships going 4k and 5.5k respectively, not how much they do.

Wow, talk about complete lack of comprehension on your part, you mean ?
First, failure to comprehend that the stuff you quoted simply stated that, yes, indeed, you CAN hurt them if they SLOW DOWN to these speeds.
Second, failure to comprehend the stuff I've been repeating, like, every other post or so... the fact that 4kps cruisers ARE JUST FREAKING FINE, only significantly above we have problems.

Originally by: Euriti
Battleships outrunning frigs? Well possible with an officer mach with overload, hg slaves and a max skilled claymore.
Cruisers, possible if you pour ****loads of isk in to it.
Normally, nop, my Ares goes 7k without implants and simple t2.

The "uberpimped" Machariel you listed could do up to 15km/sec, but a T1 rigs T2 rest of stuff version could still go 11km/sec. Get the HG snakes out and it's still above 7km/sec.
And you don't need much of an effort to get a Vagabond to similar speeds. The key is in the Claymore, the snakes and pimp mods are just the damned icing on the cake which turns "slightly overpowered" into "completely broken".


bobthebanger
Posted - 2008.07.18 06:14:00 - [104]
 

The only thing that is broken about nano ships is the stupid ****ing noobs who do not have the skill brains or isk to fly these ships WHINE LIKE 3 YEAR OLD GIRLS.

Just my 2 centsWink

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.18 11:03:00 - [105]
 

Originally by: bobthebanger
The only thing that is broken about nano ships is the stupid ****ing noobs who do not have the skill brains or isk to fly these ships WHINE LIKE 3 YEAR OLD GIRLS.
Just my 2 centsWink

Wow, so, let me get this... the ONLY acceptable way to fly in EVE is with an expensive ship at nearly maxed skills ?
If that's not the very definition of "overpowered", and completely against the EVE core concepts... I have no idea what else is.

bobthebanger
Posted - 2008.07.18 11:30:00 - [106]
 

Edited by: bobthebanger on 18/07/2008 11:36:02
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: bobthebanger
The only thing that is broken about nano ships is the stupid ****ing noobs who do not have the skill brains or isk to fly these ships WHINE LIKE 3 YEAR OLD GIRLS.
Just my 2 centsWink

Wow, so, let me get this... the ONLY acceptable way to fly in EVE is with an expensive ship at nearly maxed skills ?
If that's not the very definition of "overpowered", and completely against the EVE core concepts... I have no idea what else is.



Not at all but if i have 3 years training and spend 5 bil isk on a rare ship battleship and 2+ bil isk on implants then i would expect an advantage over a 2 month old noob.

While it is possible (with insane amounts of isk)to get ships which travel at insane speeds(and do **** all damage) it is not always practical.

99% of nano ship users do not spend this type of isk on there ships. What you and other whiners is talking about an extremely small percentage of players with very high skill points that spend multiple billions of isk on uninsurable ships.

I say **** yeah for having the balls to pvp in a ship that cost that much and these ships are by no means invulnerable.

There is nothing broken and there is nothing that needs fixing(except for your ****ing noob whiners to shut the **** up)

If you spend a reasonable amount of isk on a fitting(ie t2) then you get a reasonable effect if you spend a insane amount of isk then you get a insane effect. Nothing broken there.


Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.18 11:46:00 - [107]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 18/07/2008 11:53:24
Originally by: bobthebanger
99% of nano ship users do not spend this type of isk on there ships. What you and other whiners is talking about an extremely small percentage of players with very high skill points that spend multiple billions of isk on uninsurable ships.

I'm not talking about the upper 1% only, but anything that passes the "reasonable" limit.
That's hardly just 1% of players actively involved in PvP, and especially in FW.
Quote:
Not at all but if i have 3 years training and spend 5 bil isk on a rare ship battleship and 2+ bil isk on implants then i would expect an advantage over a 2 month old noob.

SOME level of advantage, yes.
Complete potential immunity, no way.
The whole core gameplay of EVE revolves around "a larger gang of low-SP chars in cheap ships CAN kill a single high-SP char in a very expensive ship".
This one breaks that.
Quote:
If you spend a reasonable amount of isk on a fitting(ie t2) then you get a reasonable effect if you spend a insane amount of isk then you get a insane effect. Nothing broken there.

Yes, COMPLETELY broken there. Spending huge amounts of extra ISk should bring a minimal advantage, not a huge advantage.

By your reasoning, full officer-fit Titans should be invincible solopwn machines.
Guess what, the devs think otherwise... paraphrasing, "there is no solopwnmobile in EVE" is what they used to say.
You could say though that this is nowadays wrong, since solopwnmobiles do exist - nanoships.
By that reason alone and a limitation should be already mandatory.

Quote:
these ships are by no means invulnerable.

Not invulnerable, you say ?
Imagine you ARE the pilot of a 15km/sec uberpimped Machariel.
Now, tell me in great detail, HOW could ANYBODY stop you UNLESS YOU AND ONLY YOU make a critical mistake ?
So yeah, not 100% invulnerable, but pretty damned close if the pilot pays attention and is cautious.

Now, same question for a 10km/sec battleship. Or cruiser. Or whatever.
Anything that goes so fast it gets out of web/scram/bubble range so fast by coasting alone after getting webbed/scrammed/bubbled.

bobthebanger
Posted - 2008.07.18 12:32:00 - [108]
 

Trolling removed. Navigator.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.18 12:51:00 - [109]
 

And your point is... that you can read, but can't reason ?

Aria Selenis
Minmatar
Pan Galactic Gargle Blasters
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2008.07.18 20:43:00 - [110]
 

I approve of this concept. Specifically, because sig radius has an enormous effect on tracking and missle damage, so adding more speed modules still improves a ships ability to mitigate damage through speed.

However, the "nano problem" was never with speed tanking. The problem is, nanoships can easily run away if threatened. Generally, they jump in, see bad odds... and immediately run back to the gate, in jump range by the time you can even lock them.

Alternatively, they run 400 km away. If you attempt to chase them, they have plenty of time to warp off to a safe spot and cloak.. or just MWD at 4-5000 m/s so that by the time you probe them out and warp in, they're a couple 100 km away. If you send even a faction fitted, rigged inty in after them, they still have more than enough time to warp out to another safe spot.

Fighting most nano gangs consists of about 5 seconds of fighting, where you either kill one or they all get away, followed by a couple hours of camping, probing, and otherwise chasing down a gang which is simply wasting everyones time.

Perhaps a lower speed, with the same ability to tank, would leave speed tanking a viable option.. while removing the nanoships ability to simply leave whenever it's threatened. It'd still be possible to escape, but would balance things in favor of the attackers.

An important note, though: Speed tanking should not be nerfed by this. An 8 k/s capped inty (that was 10k, with the next 2k converted to sig radius reduction) should be as hard to hit as it's old 10k/s counterpart... only now, it's harder for it to just MWD away with invulnerability.

Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
Posted - 2008.07.18 22:10:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Quote:
Not at all but if i have 3 years training and spend 5 bil isk on a rare ship battleship and 2+ bil isk on implants then i would expect an advantage over a 2 month old noob.

SOME level of advantage, yes.
Complete potential immunity, no way.

What on earth is "complete potential immunity"? Either it's complete immunity or it's potential immunity, not both.


Quote:
The whole core gameplay of EVE revolves around "a larger gang of low-SP chars in cheap ships CAN kill a single high-SP char in a very expensive ship".
This one breaks that.

Just as there are no solopwnmobiles, there are no solopwnblobs either. It is not a part of the "whole core gameplay of EVE" that bringing more ships guarantees victory. The key word, which you typed in caps, is can. Low-SP characters in T1 ships can beat nano-ships; we have already listed numerous T1 modules and simple tactics they can use. But a small group of smart players who pick the right tools can beat a blob, too. That's part of what EVE is.



Originally by: Achura T
Quote:
these ships are by no means invulnerable.

Not invulnerable, you say ?
Imagine you ARE the pilot of a 15km/sec uberpimped Machariel.
Now, tell me in great detail, HOW could ANYBODY stop you UNLESS YOU AND ONLY YOU make a critical mistake ?


They could stop you by watching and waiting for you to make a mistake. No?

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.19 01:01:00 - [112]
 

Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
What on earth is "complete potential immunity"? Either it's complete immunity or it's potential immunity, not both.

Say you could never die unless you say "ploppy bottom", in which case you instantly die.
That's a perfect example of complete potential immunity.


Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
Quote:
Now, tell me in great detail, HOW could ANYBODY stop you UNLESS YOU AND ONLY YOU make a critical mistake ?

They could stop you by watching and waiting for you to make a mistake. No?

Oh, so they can kill you if you make the mistake that you're not making ?
GREAT logic !

Euriti
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.07.19 12:34:00 - [113]
 

Edited by: Euriti on 19/07/2008 12:36:07
Originally by: Akita T
Quote:
Why do I bother discussing with deluded people?

I could probably ask the same thing myself.
Quote:
Wow, complete lack of reading comprehension. These graphs show how much dps done to nanoships going 4k and 5.5k respectively, not how much they do.

Wow, talk about complete lack of comprehension on your part, you mean ?
First, failure to comprehend that the stuff you quoted simply stated that, yes, indeed, you CAN hurt them if they SLOW DOWN to these speeds.
Second, failure to comprehend the stuff I've been repeating, like, every other post or so... the fact that 4kps cruisers ARE JUST FREAKING FINE, only significantly above we have problems.

Originally by: Euriti
Battleships outrunning frigs? Well possible with an officer mach with overload, hg slaves and a max skilled claymore.
Cruisers, possible if you pour ****loads of isk in to it.
Normally, nop, my Ares goes 7k without implants and simple t2.

The "uberpimped" Machariel you listed could do up to 15km/sec, but a T1 rigs T2 rest of stuff version could still go 11km/sec. Get the HG snakes out and it's still above 7km/sec.
And you don't need much of an effort to get a Vagabond to similar speeds. The key is in the Claymore, the snakes and pimp mods are just the damned icing on the cake which turns "slightly overpowered" into "completely broken".




A 10kps vagabond avoids 30% of a HP with Scorch harbingers damage.

30%.

That means 70% go through.

Awesome tanking.

By putting a speed cap of 4k on nanoships you make the following obsolete or not as great as they currently are:

Claymores
HG Snakes
LG snakes
Gang bonuses
Vagabonds

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.20 03:27:00 - [114]
 

Originally by: Euriti
A 10kps vagabond avoids 30% of a HP with Scorch harbingers damage.
30%. That means 70% go through.Awesome tanking.
By putting a speed cap of 4k on nanoships you make the following obsolete or not as great as they currently are:
Claymores HG Snakes LG snakes Gang bonuses Vagabonds

First off, on a 480-ish point-blank DPS Heavy Pulse II / Scorch M Harbinger, shooting at a double-LSE-II Vagabond going a bit UNDER 9kmps yields a best DPS of barely 310-ish at 23km, with under 300 at both 24km and 22km, and falling rapidly off each additional km away in either side.
That's close enough to your claim, but the problem is, the Vagabond HAS TO CIRCLE THE DAMNED HARBINGER AT THAT RANGE, NOT CLOSER. Same goes for just about any other short-range gun with long-range ammo.
If the Vaga pilot is NOT A COMPLETE MORON, he will get to a safe distance as soon as he notices he starts taking damage, and keep out of that ship's fire solution.

SECOND, the 4k cruiser "cap" is not a fixed cap, but more of a general guideline ; each ship would have individually tailored absolute top speeds ; in the case of the Vagabond, like I have already said before in this thread, the top cap would be more somewhere in between 5kmps to 6kmps. So, oooh, big whooping difference, right ?

THIRD, you seem to COMPLETELY and utterly disregard the fact that I propose that any ADDITIONAL speed past the "cap limit" be transformed into either sig radius reduction, extra agility, or a bit of both.
That means that the previous example Vaga pilot could actually orbit much tighter and still maintain a decent speed, while also being harder to hit anyway due to the sig reduction. Yeah, sure, he would have to reduce speed to hit the thing he's orbiting with his guns, but guess what, he had to do this before too anyway.


So... in other words... you were completely and utterly missing the point.
That, or in spite of being able to use EFT's new DPS graph feature, you still can't understand what it means ingame if anything gets changed from whatever EFT is showing you.
Rolling Eyes

L Cross
Posted - 2008.07.21 03:56:00 - [115]
 

Irony: A Self confessed carebear who "doesnt like to pvp" nor does he fly nanoed ships or fight against nanoed ships. Proposes a "solution" to the nano "problem".

ShockedShockedShockedShockedConfusedConfused

daytime trader
Posted - 2008.07.21 04:01:00 - [116]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Euriti
A 10kps vagabond avoids 30% of a HP with Scorch harbingers damage.
30%. That means 70% go through.Awesome tanking.
By putting a speed cap of 4k on nanoships you make the following obsolete or not as great as they currently are:
Claymores HG Snakes LG snakes Gang bonuses Vagabonds

First off, on a 480-ish point-blank DPS Heavy Pulse II / Scorch M Harbinger, shooting at a double-LSE-II Vagabond going a bit UNDER 9kmps yields a best DPS of barely 310-ish at 23km, with under 300 at both 24km and 22km, and falling rapidly off each additional km away in either side.
That's close enough to your claim, but the problem is, the Vagabond HAS TO CIRCLE THE DAMNED HARBINGER AT THAT RANGE, NOT CLOSER. Same goes for just about any other short-range gun with long-range ammo.
If the Vaga pilot is NOT A COMPLETE MORON, he will get to a safe distance as soon as he notices he starts taking damage, and keep out of that ship's fire solution.

SECOND, the 4k cruiser "cap" is not a fixed cap, but more of a general guideline ; each ship would have individually tailored absolute top speeds ; in the case of the Vagabond, like I have already said before in this thread, the top cap would be more somewhere in between 5kmps to 6kmps. So, oooh, big whooping difference, right ?

THIRD, you seem to COMPLETELY and utterly disregard the fact that I propose that any ADDITIONAL speed past the "cap limit" be transformed into either sig radius reduction, extra agility, or a bit of both.
That means that the previous example Vaga pilot could actually orbit much tighter and still maintain a decent speed, while also being harder to hit anyway due to the sig reduction. Yeah, sure, he would have to reduce speed to hit the thing he's orbiting with his guns, but guess what, he had to do this before too anyway.


So... in other words... you were completely and utterly missing the point.
That, or in spite of being able to use EFT's new DPS graph feature, you still can't understand what it means ingame if anything gets changed from whatever EFT is showing you.
Rolling Eyes



And you know all this from your years of experience flying nano ships? Or are you just an eft warrior.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.07.21 05:07:00 - [117]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 21/07/2008 05:14:42

Both of the above... ever heard of "alts" and "acquaintances" ?
I'm sure that as you get older, you will get familiar with those concepts.
And how you can use either of them to enhance knowledge.

Not seeking out PvP at every opportunity does not equal never PvP-ing.
By the way, we do have a skirmish warfare mindlink pilot in the corp.
And who says I never fly speed setups nor against speed setups ?
And pray, do tell, why the hell else would I have trained for Minnie recons ?

Also, the problem only got nasty ever since the polycarbons became relatively cheap, and it got very nasty only after FW was introduced and AE4 made a comeback.

Daelin Blackleaf
White Rose Society
Posted - 2008.07.21 23:51:00 - [118]
 

The problem with Nano's is multiple attributes, coming from a variety of sources, in high values, stacking separately, and affecting one statistic.

Take any one of these points out of the equation and speed can be brought to reasonable levels.

If mass and speed were stacked together.
If some sources were altered to provide sig radius or other bonuses.
If the values on the worst culprits were reduced.
If mass were tied to agility rather than propulsion module effectiveness.

It doesn't have to be a strict limitation, it doesn't have to be the end of speed tanking, it doesn't have to be complicated, it just needs toning down and could be done quite subtly. Once drones and missiles can catch and damage ships of the class they are designed for then CCP can start looking at the correct level of speed for tanking damage and providing tactical benefit. As it stands "nanos" have become the single best choice for a massive amount of PvP and this effectively reduces a lot of other ships and modules to being a waste of database space while simultaneously alienating every player whose chosen playstyle is not "zoom, zoom."

The only real complication from my POV is that CCP would probably benefit from simultaneously looking at how overpowered the strength of webs is and how underpowered their range is.

Daelin Blackleaf
White Rose Society
Posted - 2008.07.21 23:53:00 - [119]
 

Originally by: L Cross
Irony: A Self confessed carebear who "doesnt like to pvp" nor does he fly nanoed ships or fight against nanoed ships. Proposes a "solution" to the nano "problem".

ShockedShockedShockedShockedConfusedConfused


I suppose you'd turn down a cure for cancer if it came from someone without a tumor too?

sexygheyman
Posted - 2008.07.23 05:25:00 - [120]
 

I agree 100% nano need to be nerfed I mean a battleship going 15km/s that totally unbalanced. And hacs moving faster then intercepters thats stupid. I also think there should be some more caps put on things as well I mean look at the golem you can get that to tank more damage and have better resists then a dreadnaught this is totally unbalanced as well.

Nanos need to be fixed now they are the cancer of eft online


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