open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [VOTE] All AGAINST The Nano-Nerf
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (74)

Author Topic

Souseseki
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:51:00 - [61]
 

Edited by: Souseseki on 26/07/2008 15:41:38
against

OrlDragon
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:57:00 - [62]
 

against

Dr Nott
Gallente
Harbour Rats

Posted - 2008.07.26 15:00:00 - [63]
 

very much against

Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
Bloody Amarr's

Posted - 2008.07.26 15:01:00 - [64]
 


The Ice
Caldari
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:04:00 - [65]
 

Edited by: The Ice on 26/07/2008 21:29:52
Edited by: The Ice on 26/07/2008 15:10:52
I want to unistal EVE..:)

So pls pls pls do it..:)And we close the corp sell the charachters items whatever

Do it..:)

WTS ICE again..:)finally..:)

Suboran
Gallente
Best Path Inc.
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:05:00 - [66]
 

signed, another great example of ccp looking for an overhanded fix instead of adjusting the cause.

ccp, ask yourself this:

WHY do people fly nano ships?

Varus Riaz
Gallente
The Scope

Posted - 2008.07.26 15:14:00 - [67]
 

Against, as this pushes the game even more into a numbers game that it already can't support

Dendo Ordoss
Black Legion Command
CODE RED ALLIANCE
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:25:00 - [68]
 

/signed.

It feels like ccp are nerfing small scale combat more and more for every patch just so that larger alliances can protect their space even more effectivly.


scorp3
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:28:00 - [69]
 

signed

XFurion
Templarii Supremus PT

Posted - 2008.07.26 15:30:00 - [70]
 

balance speed eh? more like remove nano fits from the game. i really hope this doesn't go ahead. i agree some things need ot be looked at but the proposals go too far.

Gajowy
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:31:00 - [71]
 

signed

Gnomes
Caldari
Xenobytes
Stain Empire
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:39:00 - [72]
 

Edited by: Gnomes on 26/07/2008 15:50:04
AGAINST

Jagerin
Gallente
Surreal corp
Stain Empire
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:42:00 - [73]
 

Edited by: Jagerin on 26/07/2008 15:42:19
/me against
Remember about nano-HAC prices, mkay?

Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:42:00 - [74]
 

I am against the nerf in it's current form as detailed in the Dev blog.

I think it can be done less intrusive and less damaging.

Ian Murchison
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:47:00 - [75]
 

against. maybe the time spent thinking up those stupid ideas could have been spent thinking of ways to reduce lag in large scale pvp?

Spargella
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:48:00 - [76]
 

against

Dzajic
Gallente

Posted - 2008.07.26 15:50:00 - [77]
 

I fully support that only viable setups for HACs and CSs, even for those of them that are not made to be speedtanked, being a speed setup, should be nerfed. And that ships larger than frigates (and frigs T2 cousins) should never reach speeds at which they can avoid 99.99% of all incoming damage and completely break the "commit to pvp" idea of EVE by being able to disengage at will.

However, CCPs proposed fix WILL break to many things, all at once. They should at most add/fix/tweak stacking penalties for polycarbons, nerf snakes a bit NOT halve them, and SHOULD rework ship base speeds/masses/agilities.

So. CCPs proposal in full. Not supported.

eXeGee
Pink Bunnies
Cartel.
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:51:00 - [78]
 

well... i'm not quite against speed nerf, but i'm for sure AGAINST making 2in1 scrambler module (make a new one if you rly have to block mwd) and web nerf (nerfing nano counter module sux?) - it wont affect nano it will affect all kinds of warfare prolly making disbalance

Kor'El Swiftpaws
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:51:00 - [79]
 

Edited by: Kor''El Swiftpaws on 26/07/2008 15:52:05
AGAINST the nerf the way they are trying to do it.

FOR the gradual rebalancing of ship velocities and speed module bonii.

Pistaches
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:51:00 - [80]
 

Against for nano nerf.

Tyffanny
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:52:00 - [81]
 

Against for nano nerf too...

Mad Shade
4S Corporation
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:59:00 - [82]
 

Edited by: Mad Shade on 26/07/2008 16:00:23
Originally by: eXeGee
well... i'm not quite against speed nerf, but i'm for sure AGAINST making 2in1 scrambler module (make a new one if you rly have to block mwd) and web nerf (nerfing nano counter module sux?) - it wont affect nano it will affect all kinds of warfare prolly making disbalance


On the other hand, web nerf is suggest because webs are considered uber mods,
and at the same time we should get a new 2 in 1 kinda uber mod.

It is ridiculous!
And i strongly agree that this only cause more disbalance.

Edit: yes, against :)

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:59:00 - [83]
 

for

MadMax RuS
Fremen Sietch
DarkSide.
Posted - 2008.07.26 15:59:00 - [84]
 

nerf it! viva la CCP YARRRR!!YARRRR!!YARRRR!!

dapman
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.07.26 16:02:00 - [85]
 

Against!!!

ZIgi507
SoT
Soldiers of Thunderstorm
Posted - 2008.07.26 16:05:00 - [86]
 

Edited by: ZIgi507 on 26/07/2008 18:54:29
Quote:
This is not a "balancing", it is a complete removal of speed as a tactic at all in this game. Maybe poly rigs need to be brought in line with their T2 counterparts, but instead of actually nerfing the specific problem, the suggested "fix" blatantly nerfs every possible aspect of speed, which is rediculous.

qft

Against

Wesley Baird
D00M.
Triumvirate.
Posted - 2008.07.26 16:08:00 - [87]
 

Against! My corp will get a tonne more kills if the nerf goes as planned...but it benefits the large blobs far too much.


JackelEd
Posted - 2008.07.26 16:18:00 - [88]
 

AGAINST

Kostya Semer
Gallente
Free Space Pilots aka Banderlogs
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.07.26 16:19:00 - [89]
 

against.

SetInEdill
Native Freshfood

Posted - 2008.07.26 16:20:00 - [90]
 

dont kill rapier!


Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (74)

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