open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Speed Rebalanced by Nozh
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 128 129 130 131 [132] 133 134 135 136 ... : last (144)

Author Topic

Esmenet
Gallente
Posted - 2008.08.01 15:36:00 - [3931]
 

To use CCP terms this change is Ludicrous.
Its a massive nerf to small gang pvp, especially in 0.0.
And it will completely destroy whats left of the blasterships.

Deviana Sevidon
Gallente
Panta-Rhei
Butterfly Effect Alliance
Posted - 2008.08.01 16:00:00 - [3932]
 

Edited by: Deviana Sevidon on 01/08/2008 16:00:28
Quote:
I can adapt, but you unexperienced players could not.


As I said, I have adapted. But from my point of view, EVE is a simulation of spaceships, not Counterstrike and the whole nano-craze is unintended use, or may I say abuse of a gamemechanic.

When Nano-Hacs are outrunning everything, even small ships that are designed to go fast, then there is something wrong with the game mechanic. I read month ago, that the Devs do not like the ludicrous speed that some ships achieve. That a Nerf in one way or another would be incoming was really obvious.

I do not think the nerf will be the final word on balancing. For example I would like to see that shield HP boosting modules (extenders) do not increase the amount of HP that regenerate in a second. Many script using modules like sensor dampener and tracking computer could use a little boost. But that is another story for another thread.

But too, you if you are adapting, then everything is fine. Just quit whining.

Jallem Sims
Minmatar
Native Freshfood
Posted - 2008.08.01 16:14:00 - [3933]
 

this op fails to deliever... never made 150 pages. means its not a real issue tbh.

however, you all whined at each other for whining at each other it was epic fun

Starfinder
Gallente
Stormfront A.W.
Stormfront J.U.N.T.A.
Posted - 2008.08.01 16:37:00 - [3934]
 

I think this speed balancing is greatly needed and long overdue. Pilots should not be invulnerable unless they get stupid. Nano'ers talk about how Rapiers, Huginns and neut ships can easily counter them, but, of course they would never engage a gang with many of those ships. They would just run away or log. With the current insane speeds you can't even trap them in a bubble.

I am concerned about what this will do to blaster boats and Minmatar recons though. I suggest the following.
Give blaster boats a boost in base speed and tracking.
Give the ships with a current webber range bonus an additional webber effectiveness bonus. 5% per level?

Also, people are going to run back to the gate at gate camps with the webber nerf.. How about webber bubbles to help prevent that?

Thanks.

HankMurphy
Minmatar
Pelennor Swarm
Posted - 2008.08.01 16:39:00 - [3935]
 

Edited by: HankMurphy on 01/08/2008 16:39:22
Originally by: Deviana Sevidon
Edited by: Deviana Sevidon on 01/08/2008 16:00:28
Quote:
I can adapt, but you unexperienced players could not.


As I said, I have adapted. But from my point of view, EVE is a simulation of spaceships, not Counterstrike and the whole nano-craze is unintended use, or may I say abuse of a gamemechanic.

When Nano-Hacs are outrunning everything, even small ships that are designed to go fast, then there is something wrong with the game mechanic. I read month ago, that the Devs do not like the ludicrous speed that some ships achieve. That a Nerf in one way or another would be incoming was really obvious.



But please, do differentiate between those going ludicrous speeds and those ships that are simply fast.

some ships are supposed to be fast, and it is fun. i'm not saying hac's should by and large out do interceptors, but if 90% of the ppl in this thread had any idea, the ones that do are the exception, not the rule. Hell, i've flown plenty of vagabonds, i think every one went roughly 3.5-4km/s, for a vagabond that isn't ludicrous. edit: and the cap was not sustainable

the counterstrike chestnut is worn out, if by that you mean internet spaceships should be slow and calculated and have no heart pumping action, they you couldn't be more wrong.

i am playing a combat game. there is a very real element to this game that requires you to be fast in response, have a spacial awareness of where your enemy or enemies are around you and how to react to that when piloting...

or is it that INTERCEPTORS AND FRIGATES should be like counterstrike? but nothing else?

how did the guy put it in ships and mods? "i can't wait to roll my forehead across my keyboard and fire my missiles" ?something like that Razz

HankMurphy
Minmatar
Pelennor Swarm
Posted - 2008.08.01 16:49:00 - [3936]
 

Originally by: Deviana Sevidon

In the end, only those who adapt survive. I already adapted to the Nanos and I will adapt again after they nerfed. While you my friend, may go the way of the dinosaurs, after a giant meteor severely nerfed their way of living.


i just realized what a complete waste of time it was replying to you above.

i'm losing count of how many times i have to say this:

If you have to polarize this to a discussion of 'us vs them' you are an idiot.

if you cant make room in your posts to discuss the various nerfs and leave room for 'perhaps we need THIS but not THIS' you are completely single minded

.... if your entire point of this debacle is to say "ha ha, we win, you lose" your one of the worst elements in this game and the very reason changes that could be considerate and logical are instead blown out of proportion.

Exoterix
Posted - 2008.08.01 16:53:00 - [3937]
 

I thought the same thing about blaster boats, but after talking with a corp-mate of mine I don't really think this is going to be the death of the blaster boat at all. First off, you have to be within 10k to be webbed down, generally speaking. Rapiers, and Huginns are the exception to this rule, as are overheated mods. Now, webs are not going to immediately slow a MWD'ing blaster boat down. The physics engine will still allow your inertia to carry you some distance closer to the target. All that you need to do is equip a web to your blaster boat and and he's just as caught as you are. So what if your MWD gets turned off by someone who's equipped a scrambler. You're still going to be gaining ground as you slow down to normal speed. In a blaster boat, if you ran into a rapier or a huginn you were pretty much screwed blued and tattooed anyway.

This really seems like a boost to the Arazu and Lechesis more than anything else. Those are going to get to be a hot item because of their bonuses to scrambling range. As my main is a Gallente pilot I like that Scrams are getting a little love. Now if they could only give a slight boost to dampeners I'd be set for life.

Esmenet
Gallente
Posted - 2008.08.01 17:03:00 - [3938]
 

Edited by: Esmenet on 01/08/2008 17:02:58
Originally by: Deviana Sevidon

But too, you if you are adapting, then everything is fine. Just quit whining.


You can adapt by parking your HAC's and blasterboats and training Amarr or Caldari BS, but you cant adapt a BS to work in a small roaming gang in 0.0.

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2008.08.01 17:05:00 - [3939]
 

Originally by: Exoterix
I thought the same thing about blaster boats, but after talking with a corp-mate of mine I don't really think this is going to be the death of the blaster boat at all.


You need to test more, rather than listening to your mate.

Indeed, getting within range can be achieved, all be it with the use of more cap and less speed, whilst taking more damage.
But when at range, just try keeping there and getting any good hits from those blasters of yours.

There is a Great Thread in the Game Development Forum, that details the issues with blaster boats.
It's well worth a read.

Deviana Sevidon
Gallente
Panta-Rhei
Butterfly Effect Alliance
Posted - 2008.08.01 17:05:00 - [3940]
 

Ships that are designed to go fast should go fast.

A Vagabond is designed to be a hit and run cruiser, it is right now doing the job as it should be. I still think some combinations of Modules, Rigs, Gang Bonuses, Boosters and other things, go over the top.

The problem is that people looked at the vagabond, a ship that is designed to do just that and thought about ways to get their Ishtar, Sacriledge etc. to achieve the same speeds. Suddenly everyone discovered that speed is the best tank, since you are excellent at catching your target, avoiding damage and often get away when things become messy. That is a bit too good if you ask me. Therefore a Nerf is needed.

Even after the Nerf ships designed for speed will go faster then ships that do not. The Vagabond will still be able to hit and run, but the Sacriledge that is supposed to be a heavy tanked HAC have a harder time.

It will also not be the end of all HACs. Tier 2 BC have in many cases a better tank and comparable firepower, but HACs are still faster and more maneuverable and many have extra range.

What will happen with Blasterships I do not know, they were my favorite shiptype aside from Snipertempest. But since roaming gangs will have an incentive to bring other ships than nanoed Cruisers, they might have a chance again.

Most likely Blasterships will need an extra tackler but once they catch up their targets they will be deadly. MWD deactivating Scramblers will be less of an issue since the Blasterships needs the MWD primarily to get into range, not out of it.

Vitrael
Reaper Industries
Cry Havoc.
Posted - 2008.08.01 17:14:00 - [3941]
 

Hi:

130 pages of anger and a week of testing on Sisi later no new dev comments other than that a Vagabond with 4 speed mods and rigs and implants and perfect skills can "easily break 4km/s" (lol, it can't unless those implants are snakes).

Can we please get some more dev responses? I am pretty tired of being in the dark about the patch that will completely negate my 30m SP in Minmatar T2 Cruisin'.

Thanks,
-paying customer.

Hyron
Corp 1 Allstars
The Requiem
Posted - 2008.08.01 17:42:00 - [3942]
 

yesh! yesh!



GET BACK IN YOUR BATTLESHIPS ND COME FIGHT *****ES =D


/braces for eft warriors and those who use logic to solve problems..

Myra2007
Millstone Industries
Posted - 2008.08.01 18:06:00 - [3943]
 

Originally by: Vitrael

Can we please get some more dev responses? I am pretty tired of being in the dark about the patch that will completely negate my 30m SP in Minmatar T2 Cruisin'.



There is a new discussion thread open. There is also one or two posts by nozh asking for specific feedback etc.

Linkage

Tetsuo Hourai
Posted - 2008.08.01 18:48:00 - [3944]
 

Edited by: Tetsuo Hourai on 01/08/2008 18:51:23
Originally by: Esmenet
Edited by: Esmenet on 01/08/2008 17:02:58
Originally by: Deviana Sevidon

But too, you if you are adapting, then everything is fine. Just quit whining.


You can adapt by parking your HAC's and blasterboats and training Amarr or Caldari BS, but you cant adapt a BS to work in a small roaming gang in 0.0.


Die in a fire. I want my race to be good at combat with all other races, I WANT to fly blaster boats, not get them nerfed and f***ed so they are worthless, I want to be an asset in pvp without crosstraining. That is not an option for adaptation, train another f***ing race, you're ignorant if you think thats adaptation.

Melegaunt Tanthul
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.08.01 18:54:00 - [3945]
 

Originally by: Nyphur
Originally by: Tetsuo Hourai
Originally by: Nyphur
After the changes, they would have a good reason to use the 7.5km scram. With the reduction in web strength, targets could just mwd out of 7.5km scram range if you catch them with less than two webs. Disabling the target's MWD corrects this issue and assures that close range ships like blaster boats can successfully tackle. It means that if you can get within blaster range of the enemy, they aren't going anywhere. The point has been made that a blaster boat will have to be within range of the enemy's 7.5km scram to attack and that's a valid concern. However, a blaster ship doesn't NEED its microwarpdrive once it's reached its target.



READ: if you can get within blaster range of the enemy, they aren't going anywhere.

READ: if you can get within blaster range of the enemy, they aren't going anywhere.

If I am to believe that my target is going to sit around while I get within scram range, either one of us or both of us need to quit this game. If I cannot make use of my 24km disrupter because the enemy can just fly away from me because the speed reduction makes my ship (the Astarte)slow as ****, then blaster combat is indeed dead. No one, read: NO ONE is going to see my ship warp in at 22ks and sit. .. . sit and wait for me to get within 7.5ks. . . they. . . will. . . just. . . fly. . .away. . .

Exactly, you'll have a choice between using a long range scram to get the initial tackle or using the short range scram if you have a tackler buddy along with you. The short range scram means you can be sure the enemy won't mwd away but the long range one means you can get the initial tackle. For fleet action, that short range scram is going to be extremely useful.

You can argue that using the long range scram isn't viable as when you get close enough to use your blasters, the enemy can shut off your mwd with a short range scram an escape. However, that won't let them escape because they have to stay within 7.5km range (and thus within your blaster range) to keep your mwd shut off. If they try to escape using their MWD, yours will reactivate once the enemy gets over 7.5km from you and you'll still have your 20km scram on them. You can resume chasing them immediately.

If you don't want to use the short range scram, just don't. Using a 20km scram will mean you'll have to chase your enemy with his MWD still active, but that still puts you on equal footing as it does right now. Very little will actually be changed.


You are making seriously mistaken assumptions. Your target will not use mwd as i't useless now. He will use AB because he will most certainly expect to be scrambled otherwise they're dumb and it's not a proper example. So he can run away while he or a tackles is scrambling your bs.
Also you assume that you're using a scrambler and a disruptor, coupled with mwd. Wrong again because of the limit of medium slots on armor tanked BS (eg a cap injector is a must with mwd in pvp otherwise you're out of cap immediately).
Last by not least you're assuming 1on1 and no one but no one fights 1on1 in battleships. You don't undock BS without a gang. So you BS will be tackled with a scrambled the momment it warps in. You will never ever move 1km from your original warp in point.
Your obviously not a pvper or a very newbie one as seen by your assumptions.

Abrynn
Minmatar
CCCP INC
Posted - 2008.08.01 19:16:00 - [3946]
 

Edited by: Abrynn on 01/08/2008 19:38:56
All i gotta say is after you nerf my best PvPer i sure hope you make some of my ships better .... did anyone everthink that maybe the reason Mini's always undock in a HAC/Recon is because they are the best ships mini's have ... and while we are at it have any of you ever noticed that mini ships have less armor and shields of any race because its suppost to be the fastest race? Hensforth the ducktape comments there is a reason ppl say that. Besides time, isk and rl there are other reasons this is a ******ed move it affects all of eve. Its all nano mods so that affects t2 invention, ships (look more t2 invention/ building) cause ppl arent gonna buy them, MWD's cause well tbh these will drop too, lets not forget the webs that just dont seem to work in sisi they wont sell either.So whats this,lets point out that the market is gonna crash not only for the ppl doing invention/building but for the ppl who make the t2 components / and riggs!!! It effects PvP as well as 4 races mini/gall/amarr/caldari because of the ability to web/scram is gonna be crap o yeah it will affect you missile spammers too because if your tanked proper you cant scramble/webb so think about that, this nerf is going to make PvP even more laggy and bloby cause to make up for the things they are nerfing there will be more ppl needed in gang so if you ppl think this is gonna make things better lol think again. This effects us all from industry to PvP from amarr to caldari if you dont believe me do some looking at things and ask indy ppl. Plus ppl always complain about Nano but the thing to think about is when u think of nano /ludacris speed did you ever think of if that ship was able to hit you going full speed? of course they cant exept the ishtar because of the drones and for the ones complaining about ppl running and being a nano pilot ive complained too and still do sometimes im not saying that there shouldnt be a speed nerf because i honestly think there should be but not like this ... this affects WAY WAY WAY too much at once there has to be a better way, You CCP guys better ask your economist about this and really think hard.

For all you ppl that just wanna fight with each other back and forth this is stupid do me a favor all of you do you homework and actually think about it and you know CCP isnt paying attention to us anyways so whats the point, Can we adapt and adjust yes we can everyone can!! do we want to lose isk skill training time and just the plain all out time ive put into this game? time we have all put into this game? No we dont. Do i want to have to train another race do i think CCP should make me have to no! In the same manner no one wants to have to train sumthing they dont want to...so do me a favar and just think about things Crying or Very sad

EDIT : you guys should post here too btw
http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=833782&page=1

Pr1ncess Alia
Posted - 2008.08.01 19:57:00 - [3947]
 

Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 01/08/2008 20:01:40
jesus christ.
wall of text much?
edit: i do actually agree with you. that just hurt my eyeballs

Nyphur
Pillowsoft
Posted - 2008.08.01 21:41:00 - [3948]
 

Originally by: Melegaunt Tanthul
You are making seriously mistaken assumptions. Your target will not use mwd as i't useless now. He will use AB because he will most certainly expect to be scrambled otherwise they're dumb and it's not a proper example. So he can run away while he or a tackles is scrambling your bs.
Also you assume that you're using a scrambler and a disruptor, coupled with mwd. Wrong again because of the limit of medium slots on armor tanked BS (eg a cap injector is a must with mwd in pvp otherwise you're out of cap immediately).
Last by not least you're assuming 1on1 and no one but no one fights 1on1 in battleships. You don't undock BS without a gang. So you BS will be tackled with a scrambled the momment it warps in. You will never ever move 1km from your original warp in point.
Your obviously not a pvper or a very newbie one as seen by your assumptions.

Melegaunt, I don't know what to tell you except I made absolutely none of those assumptions. If you would be so kind as to point out how you arrived at the conclusion that I did, I'll gladly contradict them.

TaterTard
Posted - 2008.08.01 22:07:00 - [3949]
 

Echoing the comments of others, my main concern is the effectiveness of Minny Recons. Now if at the same time that you nerf webs to 60% max, you would give target painters the ability to shut off MWDs like the proposed scram change, the Recons could tackle again.

Thorradin
State Protectorate
Posted - 2008.08.01 22:27:00 - [3950]
 

Originally by: Esmenet
To use CCP terms this change is Ludicrous.
Its a massive nerf to small gang pvp, especially in 0.0.
And it will completely destroy whats left of the blasterships.


You do recall posts like yours, that just complain but give no worthwhile substance, are likely being page down'd over right?

A bunch of people saying over and over 'omg this is bad ur killin eve' without solid reasons why are just wasting time, just like those supporting it saying 'omg yay eve pvp r fixd' aren't helping.

The AF thread I read alittle early actually showed a nice effect that seems to be happening with this (AFs no longer nearly worthless despite only having 3 bonuses).

R3DSKULL
Amarr
Fallen Angel's
White Noise.
Posted - 2008.08.01 23:08:00 - [3951]
 

There is a dynamic being taken away here. From A pvp standpoint its always been pre speed, you fit either gank or tank. This is pre plate. Then came the speed initiative. So we added a paper, scissors, rock element. We have gank, tank and speed. if a tank ship gets engaged by a speed ship it can usually tank it but cannot take it down. A gank ship can take a tank ship but a speed ship cant gank, it cannot tank, either. So it can only run or kill gank ships. Tank ships are best for dealing with gank ships pure gank, and speed is best for dealing with most gank. So it creates a triplistic dynamic. i know this is generalising as some ships dont work against eachother in such fashion but for most part this third speed dynamic creates a sort of balance of the two gank, tank mentalities. often u find if a vaga tackles a well skilled raven pilot in a belt he cant take him down. he has to have some dps backup. Where as an ishtar tends to be find in dps dept,but has to run if nano ships chase it as its weak as **** unless id abandons its drones.

Hacs like recons have become very specialised. IMho no way should a BC thats 30mil be able to hands down spank a hac thats 80 to a 100mil. Thats silly. With this new nerf it puts hacs down even more. If CCP is gonna nerf this they should consider nerfing the amount it takes to build hacs so they can drop below the cost of BC. I seriously hope speed is adressed but this method of all at once is ****e. Lets do a little at a time. My suggestion which i feel is the simplest one in game. like thermodynamics. how when u overuse a module it gets damaged. Simple if a ship goes to fast it takes damage from that speed. Or u govern them. A vaga can still be the same so can all the rest but when they hit speeds of 10k or more then get damage, they so to say would rattle apart. Take star trek for example those ships can only go so fast in warp or they risk coming apart. CCP needs to stop this nerf take away thinking they always go for. Move more along the lines of limiting. Its faster and easier to govern ships, or make a cost for taking such actions. Then people can not lose what time and money they spent. but they pay a price when they use it. THe nano mach 10bil pilots would pay the most when they hit speeds of 10kms so they might be more inclined to only use it when dire situations occur. Webs nerf is crap. THis i hope doesnt happen webs are fine. They have been fine since 2k5 when i started. SCramblers well thas another story im not sure i stand in the middle with them. THey have a price. the MWD delay is crap. And the module changes and speed nerfs are the wrong approach. I doubt this will even get read but i can be hopeful a dev sees this and considers this very simple solution. Lets not regress to 2k5 tank, or gank style eve play. ITs laggy enough thank u.

Pithecanthropus
Posted - 2008.08.01 23:09:00 - [3952]
 

Small gang pvp will still be alive. What the heck are all you nanoweenies whining about? Small gang pvp will always be here. Just cuz you can't take a small gang and pick off an uber fleet one by one anymore is the only issue you are concerned about. Small gang pvp will remain, you just need to look for similar numbers for targets. Gone will be the days of little weenie alliances and corps declaring war on large entities to knock them off one-by-one with little recourse and risk. If you ask me, that is what was flawed and is now going to be fixed.

It's been rebalanced... and will one day need to be rebalanced again. That is what keeps this game going... thank goodness for people who realize that. shame to those with selfish ego trips.


Red Thunder
WEPRA CORP
White Noise.
Posted - 2008.08.02 00:17:00 - [3953]
 

Originally by: Pithecanthropus
Small gang pvp will still be alive. What the heck are all you nanoweenies whining about? Small gang pvp will always be here. Just cuz you can't take a small gang and pick off an uber fleet one by one anymore is the only issue you are concerned about. Small gang pvp will remain, you just need to look for similar numbers for targets. Gone will be the days of little weenie alliances and corps declaring war on large entities to knock them off one-by-one with little recourse and risk. If you ask me, that is what was flawed and is now going to be fixed.

It's been rebalanced... and will one day need to be rebalanced again. That is what keeps this game going... thank goodness for people who realize that. shame to those with selfish ego trips.




so what your saying is that you want everyone to have to blob to be able to fight?

Elridon
Caldari
Vertex Tactical Solutions
Posted - 2008.08.02 00:59:00 - [3954]
 

Edited by: Elridon on 02/08/2008 01:01:59
While the nerf itself is sad to see contemplated, from what I've seen in the thread (only read 50 pages in, 132 is just too damn much), all of the responses by the devs have been snippy defensive remarks. There was one, ONE, post that was semi-decent, back on page 30 or 31.

I'm all for vagabonds not going 13km/s anymore, but seriously, 4 after a snake set? Minmatar ships having the largest mass? It's just too much of a change to every aspect of every ship at once. It's worse than being a nub and just learning the game like the way CCP apparently wants it to be. Crying or Very sad

Around the time of the first nano-nerf (the one where they changed the nanofibers, i-stabs, overdrives, some other stuff I really don't remember) I was training for a phoon, looked like a fun ship. Nerf hit, I trained for other races in case a nerf of what I like/wanted to fly was pulled again. Really didn't expect every damn ship ingame to get hit with a nerf ugh Looks like it's time to train cruise missiles 2, eh?

------------------

Edit: Doh, just saw that there is a new thread about it. Time to read another 50 pages.

Esmenet
Gallente
Posted - 2008.08.02 01:35:00 - [3955]
 

Originally by: Thorradin
Originally by: Esmenet
To use CCP terms this change is Ludicrous.
Its a massive nerf to small gang pvp, especially in 0.0.
And it will completely destroy whats left of the blasterships.


You do recall posts like yours, that just complain but give no worthwhile substance, are likely being page down'd over right?

A bunch of people saying over and over 'omg this is bad ur killin eve' without solid reasons why are just wasting time, just like those supporting it saying 'omg yay eve pvp r fixd' aren't helping.

The AF thread I read alittle early actually showed a nice effect that seems to be happening with this (AFs no longer nearly worthless despite only having 3 bonuses).


Its pretty obvious for anyone thats actually lived in 0.0.

But wohooo AF's will be slightly more useful while hac's, intys and blasterships are firmly stuck in the pile of useless junk. Rolling Eyes

Luckyduck
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.08.02 04:29:00 - [3956]
 

Edited by: Luckyduck on 02/08/2008 04:29:37
Originally by: Elridon
Edited by: Elridon on 02/08/2008 01:01:59
While the nerf itself is sad to see contemplated, from what I've seen in the thread (only read 50 pages in, 132 is just too damn much), all of the responses by the devs have been snippy defensive remarks. There was one, ONE, post that was semi-decent, back on page 30 or 31.

I'm all for vagabonds not going 13km/s anymore, but seriously, 4 after a snake set? Minmatar ships having the largest mass? It's just too much of a change to every aspect of every ship at once. It's worse than being a nub and just learning the game like the way CCP apparently wants it to be. Crying or Very sad

Around the time of the first nano-nerf (the one where they changed the nanofibers, i-stabs, overdrives, some other stuff I really don't remember) I was training for a phoon, looked like a fun ship. Nerf hit, I trained for other races in case a nerf of what I like/wanted to fly was pulled again. Really didn't expect every damn ship ingame to get hit with a nerf ugh Looks like it's time to train cruise missiles 2, eh?

------------------

Edit: Doh, just saw that there is a new thread about it. Time to read another 50 pages.


I'm at a loss where people think 4km/s is slow for a hac... It's a Hac, not an interceptor ffs... get over yourselves.

Maybe sure it could use a tweak, but honestly, if I see vagas get much higher than 5km/s and any other hac beyond 2200m/s (3km with snakes), it's just not gonna be enough. Hacs were ment to be harder tanked, heavier hitting ships... hense the "heavy assault ship" title. Recons were ment to be ECCM ships. Neither were ment to be interceptors.

Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.08.02 06:22:00 - [3957]
 

Originally by: Luckyduck
Edited by: Luckyduck on 02/08/2008 04:29:37
Originally by: Elridon
Edited by: Elridon on 02/08/2008 01:01:59
While the nerf itself is sad to see contemplated, from what I've seen in the thread (only read 50 pages in, 132 is just too damn much), all of the responses by the devs have been snippy defensive remarks. There was one, ONE, post that was semi-decent, back on page 30 or 31.

I'm all for vagabonds not going 13km/s anymore, but seriously, 4 after a snake set? Minmatar ships having the largest mass? It's just too much of a change to every aspect of every ship at once. It's worse than being a nub and just learning the game like the way CCP apparently wants it to be. Crying or Very sad

Around the time of the first nano-nerf (the one where they changed the nanofibers, i-stabs, overdrives, some other stuff I really don't remember) I was training for a phoon, looked like a fun ship. Nerf hit, I trained for other races in case a nerf of what I like/wanted to fly was pulled again. Really didn't expect every damn ship ingame to get hit with a nerf ugh Looks like it's time to train cruise missiles 2, eh?

------------------

Edit: Doh, just saw that there is a new thread about it. Time to read another 50 pages.


I'm at a loss where people think 4km/s is slow for a hac... It's a Hac, not an interceptor ffs... get over yourselves.

Maybe sure it could use a tweak, but honestly, if I see vagas get much higher than 5km/s and any other hac beyond 2200m/s (3km with snakes), it's just not gonna be enough. Hacs were ment to be harder tanked, heavier hitting ships... hense the "heavy assault ship" title. Recons were ment to be ECCM ships. Neither were ment to be interceptors.



Hear I go thinking all your Req guys were nano***s. I take back my assumption.

mamolian
Cruoris Seraphim
Posted - 2008.08.02 06:53:00 - [3958]
 

132 pages lol Laughing

dojocan81
Caminus Trux Germani
Ewoks
Posted - 2008.08.02 09:30:00 - [3959]
 

Edited by: dojocan81 on 02/08/2008 09:29:59
Originally by: mamolian
132 pages lol Laughing


and most of them contain only whine & s**t...

Katarlia Simov
Minmatar
Cowboys From Hell
Posted - 2008.08.02 09:44:00 - [3960]
 

Originally by: Luckyduck
Edited by: Luckyduck on 02/08/2008 04:29:37
Originally by: Elridon
Edited by: Elridon on 02/08/2008 01:01:59
While the nerf itself is sad to see contemplated, from what I've seen in the thread (only read 50 pages in, 132 is just too damn much), all of the responses by the devs have been snippy defensive remarks. There was one, ONE, post that was semi-decent, back on page 30 or 31.

I'm all for vagabonds not going 13km/s anymore, but seriously, 4 after a snake set? Minmatar ships having the largest mass? It's just too much of a change to every aspect of every ship at once. It's worse than being a nub and just learning the game like the way CCP apparently wants it to be. Crying or Very sad

Around the time of the first nano-nerf (the one where they changed the nanofibers, i-stabs, overdrives, some other stuff I really don't remember) I was training for a phoon, looked like a fun ship. Nerf hit, I trained for other races in case a nerf of what I like/wanted to fly was pulled again. Really didn't expect every damn ship ingame to get hit with a nerf ugh Looks like it's time to train cruise missiles 2, eh?

------------------

Edit: Doh, just saw that there is a new thread about it. Time to read another 50 pages.


I'm at a loss where people think 4km/s is slow for a hac... It's a Hac, not an interceptor ffs... get over yourselves.

Maybe sure it could use a tweak, but honestly, if I see vagas get much higher than 5km/s and any other hac beyond 2200m/s (3km with snakes), it's just not gonna be enough. Hacs were ment to be harder tanked, heavier hitting ships... hense the "heavy assault ship" title. Recons were ment to be ECCM ships. Neither were ment to be interceptors.


Problem is that tanking in this game doesn't often achieve much. Since buffer tanks are SO much better than active tanks, HACs are just outclassed in that department by both BC and BS even though they are supposedly built to tank.

Now, becuase everyone and their mum fits plates and extenders, for a HAC to be worth using, it needs to put a crapton of damage on to cut through it and have a chance to live. However, they can't do that either, because pvp bs fits outclass them in that department too. So you are left trying to kill someone who has masses more HP than you and who is doing more damage.

How do you survive in this situation ? You use the advantage that a HAC has over a BS of course. SPEED.

Because seriously, if you make HACs sit and slug it out, they just loose so hard its not funny.

I mean there should be a reason to fly something that costs as much as a tier 2 BS, does less damage, tanks less well and has lower flexability and fitting choices. At the moment, HACs are great because they are able to use the one area they are better than BS to kill them. Take that away, and theres no reason to ever fly anything other than a tackler or a BS. All hail 'variety' in set-ups.


Pages: first : previous : ... 128 129 130 131 [132] 133 134 135 136 ... : last (144)

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