open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Titan weekly Greyscale interview..and the speed nerf..
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6

Author Topic

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 11:35:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: BiggestT on 07/10/2008 12:22:33

Edited by: BiggestT on 07/10/2008 11:36:31
http://www.titanweekly.com/Podcast/podcast-pages/podcast13.html

At the start of this interview theres a bit of rp stuff which u just skip through hehe.
Then the interview with greyscale starts.

Of course theres the usual "congratulations on Empyrian age" with a serving of "yay for FW" on the side, but then things get interesting when the speed talk starts.

In a nutshell, greyscale was saying that the reason their nerfing speed is nothing to do with balance/lack of counters etc, but the fact that EVERYONE fitted for speed. He had a b*tch about the zealot getting nano'd when its not sposed to (I lol'd).

Then they talked about other boring stuff like ambulation and fanfest..

Now my opinion..
WTF ARE YOU THINKING??
Their whole reasoning is to remove the homogonisation of speed in EVE. This is just ****ing hilarious. YOU CAN NEVER REMOVE THE NEED FOR SPEED!

THE single reason ppl fit for speed is survivavability, If my CS has no mwd it will die to the first bubble, suck for aligning in roaming, fail at roaming tactics such as the need to reproach gates etc.

Have they EVEN considered this??
Their actually NERFING all the ships that arent designed for speed, as they will be so hopelessly slow that they will get caught and die, or just be useless for roaming gangs.

FAIL CCP Evil or Very Mad

/rant

Troll away :)

(edit) PS- One cool thing in the interview, was tech 3 speculation. Its not out of the picture and is more likely than not going to be implemented one day. Every cloud has its silver lining Laughing

other edits: typos


Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2008.10.07 11:45:00 - [2]
 

There's a world of difference between everyone having a MWD and nano.

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 11:47:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: BiggestT on 07/10/2008 11:47:22
Originally by: Gypsio III
There's a world of difference between everyone having a MWD and nano.

Not when they nerf ship base speed and mwd's themselves Rolling Eyes

Warrio
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.10.07 11:50:00 - [4]
 

Consider this:
Speed nerf or not, Eve will still be an awesome game and far far better than WoW if you seek meaningful PvP and an actual economy.

Didn't contribute much to your post but still, it's nice to think about.

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 11:51:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Warrio
Consider this:
Speed nerf or not, Eve will still be an awesome game and far far better than WoW if you seek meaningful PvP and an actual economy.

Didn't contribute much to your post but still, it's nice to think about.


Hey that actually makes me feel better :D
Nerf away CCP!
Eve will still be good in an ibis!

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2008.10.07 11:54:00 - [6]
 

Your post is fairly incomprehensible actually. What exsactly are you trying to say?

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 11:57:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
Your post is fairly incomprehensible actually. What exsactly are you trying to say?


That CCP's intentions are completely misguided.

Their goal is to remove the "M for mandatory in mwd" necessity of today.

But rather than come up with incentives NOT to use a mwd, they simply press the
nerf button and gimp a whole lot of other ships inderectly in the process.


arbalesttom
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:01:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: BiggestT
Originally by: Gypsio III
Your post is fairly incomprehensible actually. What exsactly are you trying to say?


That CCP's intentions are completely misguided.

Their goal is to remove the "M for mandatory in mwd" necessity of today.

But rather than come up with incentives NOT to use a mwd, they simply press the
nerf button and gimp a whole lot of other ships inderectly in the process.




Have to agree with this. Ive been watching out for this whole speednerf for a long time now, until i found how this speednerf would be going to happen.Sad

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:03:00 - [9]
 

Oh and it may have sounded a bit confusing first off as i gave a brief overview of the interview than had a rant about CCP's intentions with the speed nerf

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:04:00 - [10]
 

The thing that I'm worried about with the nanonerf is that we'll see the dictor effect.

Dictors got speed-nerfed because people were crying about faction-fit Sabres doing 954645645m/s. So CCP nerfed the whole class.

Result?

Now the Sabre is the only dictor that's not a disposable 1-shot flying coffin.

When only the HACs "designed to be fast" can go at all fast, will they be the only HACs that are worth flying at all? We're seeing the dictor effect again - highly expensive "edge case" fits are being used to hit a whole class with a savage nerf - with the all-too possible result that only those edge-case fits will be viable. The attempt to reduce homogeneity in fits ends up in reducing variety still further.
As the post above said, HACs need to be fast and agile* - if your doing something that doesn't need speed and agility, dock up and get in an insurable BC with more tank and more DPS, or you'll lose your 150M+ ISK HAC to the guy that did get in a 40M (after insurance) BC.

The whole "nerf nanos" thing was just lame. All that was really needed was a reduction in polycarbs' mass reduction, and a missile velocity/explosion velocity script for tracking computers. Maybe a rebalancing of snake set bonuses in line with the other pirate sets, to limit those "edge-case" game engine breaking speeds (or just make implant bonuses non-cumulative with gang bonuses).

*Barring niche ships like sniper-cerbs/eagles


Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:06:00 - [11]
 

Speed nerf will bring back non cookie cutter setups and more tactics then simply slapping mwd and polycarbs on every ship. Now mwd isnt the best mod in every pvp situation; sometimes an ab is much better. That is obviously good. A mwding CS will still have the same speed, what is your problem? Frigs will still be fast for fast assaults in enemy territory. The only thing that has changed is that you cant bring 500-600dps ships and be as survivable as frigs (or even more). Adapt.

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:07:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
The thing that I'm worried about with the nanonerf is that we'll see the dictor effect.

Dictors got speed-nerfed because people were crying about faction-fit Sabres doing 954645645m/s. So CCP nerfed the whole class.

Result?

Now the Sabre is the only dictor that's not a disposable 1-shot flying coffin.

When only the HACs "designed to be fast" can go at all fast, will they be the only HACs that are worth flying at all? We're seeing the dictor effect again - highly expensive "edge case" fits are being used to hit a whole class with a savage nerf - with the all-too possible result that only those edge-case fits will be viable. The attempt to reduce homogeneity in fits ends up in reducing variety still further.
As the post above said, HACs need to be fast and agile* - if your doing something that doesn't need speed and agility, dock up and get in an insurable BC with more tank and more DPS, or you'll lose your 150M+ ISK HAC to the guy that did get in a 40M (after insurance) BC.

The whole "nerf nanos" thing was just lame. All that was really needed was a reduction in polycarbs' mass reduction, and a missile velocity/explosion velocity script for tracking computers. Maybe a rebalancing of snake set bonuses in line with the other pirate sets, to limit those "edge-case" game engine breaking speeds (or just make implant bonuses non-cumulative with gang bonuses).

*Barring niche ships like sniper-cerbs/eagles




Aye this,
but this time its much worse.

CS are getting gimped (no point using one atm, even less point using one post nerf as speed is lost),
Blaster boats are getting gimped (enjoy getting in range!)
HACs are getting gimped (as Malcanis highlighted)
And hmm..pretty much most t2 sub-bs are getting gimped too!

EVE 2009
BS+BC with RR online
(even more so if they nerf falcons too lol)

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:10:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
A mwding CS will still have the same speed, what is your problem?


U did read the dev blog right?
MWD bonus is getting reduced, while ship base speeds are getting reduced (so the sleip will prbably be slower base speed, unsure on other cs)

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:10:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Gypsio III on 07/10/2008 12:11:23
Originally by: BiggestT
Originally by: Gypsio III
Your post is fairly incomprehensible actually. What exsactly are you trying to say?


That CCP's intentions are completely misguided.

Their goal is to remove the "M for mandatory in mwd" necessity of today.

But rather than come up with incentives NOT to use a mwd, they simply press the
nerf button and gimp a whole lot of other ships inderectly in the process.


Ok, that makes sense.

But I don't believe they are trying to remove the "M for Mandatory". I think they're trying to put a firm upper limit on speeds after the last failed speed nerf, although they may well be a little over-enthusiastic about it. As you say, because of bubbles, reapproaching etc, MWD will always be mandatory.

The idea about scramblers deactivating MWD doesn't change the usefulness of a MWD, sicne it operates at range similar to that of webs. An across-board speed/agility decrease, so MWDing BS, BC, CS etc will be slower and less agile, and therefore less able to burn out of a bubble or back to a gate, is a potential problem, but one that depends on the magnitude of the changes, and it won't make MWDs on heavy units any less necessary.

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:11:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 07/10/2008 12:12:25
Originally by: BiggestT
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
A mwding CS will still have the same speed, what is your problem?


U did read the dev blog right?
MWD bonus is getting reduced, while ship base speeds are getting reduced (so the sleip will prbably be slower base speed, unsure on other cs)


Its still the same changes that were introduced back on sisi a while back right? My mwding CS wasnt all that much slower tbh. A little, but not much. Anyways all field commands need a boost anyway.

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:15:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: BiggestT on 07/10/2008 12:15:57
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 07/10/2008 12:12:25
Originally by: BiggestT
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
A mwding CS will still have the same speed, what is your problem?


U did read the dev blog right?
MWD bonus is getting reduced, while ship base speeds are getting reduced (so the sleip will prbably be slower base speed, unsure on other cs)


Its still the same changes that were introduced back on sisi a while back right? My mwding CS wasnt all that much slower tbh. A little, but not much. Anyways all field commands need a boost anyway.


Just checked again, MWD Bonus doesnt change my bad.. Well currently my nighthawk barely sc****s in at a meager 1000+ms, if it goes under the 1k mark, ill be very angry..

Remember this though, mwd's will be disabled by scrams which really gimps the slower ships which are easier to tackle.

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:26:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: BiggestT


Just checked again, MWD Bonus doesnt change my bad.. Well currently my nighthawk barely sc****s in at a meager 1000+ms, if it goes under the 1k mark, ill be very angry..

Remember this though, mwd's will be disabled by scrams which really gimps the slower ships which are easier to tackle.


Yeah, but then there is a reason to put ABs on. And with the boost they are not THAT bad. But heck, doesnt matter, the primary problem of our beloved field commands are not an mwd issue. Sad

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:31:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: BiggestT


Just checked again, MWD Bonus doesnt change my bad.. Well currently my nighthawk barely sc****s in at a meager 1000+ms, if it goes under the 1k mark, ill be very angry..

Remember this though, mwd's will be disabled by scrams which really gimps the slower ships which are easier to tackle.


Yeah, but then there is a reason to put ABs on. And with the boost they are not THAT bad. But heck, doesnt matter, the primary problem of our beloved field commands are not an mwd issue. Sad


Aye thats true lol,
But an ab, even with a boost, simply wont be fast enough for fleet work.
Put it this way, would u prefer ur cs with the speed it has now with an mwd or with the speed itll have post-patch with an mwd or even an ab?

Fact is its just another nerf for CS.
Lets look at them currently..
-They already suffer from high cost compared to ability,
-Terrible fitting issues (WHY I ASK?? Their t2 bc's that cost heaps and CCP wont give them superior (let alone equal) fittings to tier 2 bc's)
-Horrible layouts
-Most cant fit an warfare link and be viable..

Now we get hit with this to boot Rolling Eyes

I mean i hate the drake i really do, but damn, CCP are making them hard to refuse ugh

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:34:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
There's a world of difference between everyone having a MWD and nano.

Exactly. I will still be fitting MWD on my ships regardless of what they do to it, simply because its convenient for travel and escape.

The problem with speed and why it has to be changed is that anything with a low-slot is being nano'ed.
Zealot, Sacrilege, Ishtar, Cerberus, Curse .. even Titans have been nano'ed for goddess sake.
When anything becomes the de facto standard it needs to be looked at, which is what CCP is trying to do. If they can sort out the issues in regards to missiles hitting the slower targets, combat will be less 'twitch' based and more skill based which is good in my book

The whole argument about "what are we going to do about the monolithic alliances/blobs" is pointless, there is no rule that forces you to engage every ship you come across. Myths aside, if David really wants to take on Goliath he had better damn well bring more than a slingshot or he gets squished .. as it should be, knives to gunfights and all that.

As for commandships becoming obsolete .. I am assuming you are primarily concerned about the Claymore/Sleipnir which are nano CCs of choice due link bonus' and lots of free low slots. have you tried tanking these, they require some massive firepower to take out in any kind of reasonable timeframe .. provided of course you don't fill them up with overdrives and what not.

Personally I am very much looking forward to the bigger ships being big brutish powerhouses relying on smaller craft to keep their vicinity clear - makes a lot more sense than a massive hulking gun platform being able to kill anything.

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:57:00 - [20]
 

Im talking about all Hirana, mwd is essential in 0.0 ops.

And you may like it but, Im definately not looking foward to BS's -with support the trusty sidekick!- online.


BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 15:00:00 - [21]
 

Hmm..no trolls from Merin is encouraging Very Happy
I may actually have a point this time x)

Wet Ferret
Posted - 2008.10.07 15:19:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: BiggestT

THE single reason ppl fit for speed is survivavability, If my CS has no mwd it will die to the first bubble, suck for aligning in roaming, fail at roaming tactics such as the need to reproach gates etc.



Well, you seem to understand the problem. Dictor spheres and warp bubbles were put in game for a reason.

Understandably, easily getting past these things in just about any ship is an issue in CCPs eyes. Then there is the problem of not needing to commit to a fight due to ease of escape, a la WCS.

Not that I agree with the changes they've presented. But "what are they thinking?"... well that's pretty obvious.

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2008.10.07 15:28:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Wet Ferret
Originally by: BiggestT

THE single reason ppl fit for speed is survivavability, If my CS has no mwd it will die to the first bubble, suck for aligning in roaming, fail at roaming tactics such as the need to reproach gates etc.



Well, you seem to understand the problem. Dictor spheres and warp bubbles were put in game for a reason.

Understandably, easily getting past these things in just about any ship is an issue in CCPs eyes. Then there is the problem of not needing to commit to a fight due to ease of escape, a la WCS.

Not that I agree with the changes they've presented. But "what are they thinking?"... well that's pretty obvious.


Most ships cant easily get past these things. They simply hang in a precarious balance where: If they were any worse in such situations they would be terribly gimped.

Ships like omg speed fits should be nerfed of course (poly's + snakes nerfed..DONE)
Wheras fast ships like intercpetors are designed to be good at such situations, but remeber all they can do is tackle, they have poor dps and cant do much else. So imo, That wld be balanced..

Ethan Hawk
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.10.07 15:40:00 - [24]
 

the main problem, to my opinion, will stay in these really large Bubbles and Dictors and Heavy Dictors and stuff like this.

It's a simple fact that MWDs got to BS Fleets when CCP deployed large Bubbles in Tech1 and Tech2. Before that most of proofed FCs favoured AB or non Speedmod BS. With the commence of MWD fitted BS into fleets, there was the need for more spped on support... yeah guess what happened??? Everyone nanoed his ship to simply get out of this huge bubbles.

I can understand CCP when they need to change something. But tbh:
Who will survive Bubblecamps then anymore? It will be fairly easy to avoid enemy contact in your own system then. All you will need is a cynojammer and a large bubble camp... yeah EvE2009Cool

Ethan Hawk
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.10.07 15:53:00 - [25]
 

and I fully agree to your explanation Biggest.

Take out or nerf those Snakes and Ploys... this will suit enough. If you kill speed outcome of an interceptor, nvm if it's relativ or absolut, no one will use them anymore... for what???

Get your hands on those 9k Vagas... they make my really jeaulous, cause I can just fly with 8,5k/sWink

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2008.10.07 16:59:00 - [26]
 

Comments:
- Annoying podcast.
- Prepare for podcast by examining the content *before* the podcast (including numbers and news stories)
- Don't breath into the mic.

Re: Greyscale:
Comments:
- They expected fleet blobbing in FW. At least they're planning to fix it.. someday
- Greyscale is in charge of PVE... not PVP and game balancing. He isn't in charge of how and why the speed nerf happened (though he supports it).
- Greyscale is an Amarr player and has a natural set of biases against something that can outrun him.
- The speed nerf isn't dead.. (obviously)
- Fitting incorrectly *always* means death. This is an axiom of Eve and has nothing to do with nano.

-Liang

Cailais
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2008.10.07 18:22:00 - [27]
 

To be fair CCP Greyscale did make it clear the rebalancing of 'speed' in EVE was not part of his portfolio, and he merely offered a personal view

- I think that's great that CCP Dev are still prepared to do that, even if its not their specific area. To then twist CCP Greyscale's comments into a generic 'CCP Statement' is unrepresentative of what was actually said.

C.



Liang Nuren
Posted - 2008.10.07 18:24:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Cailais
To be fair CCP Greyscale did make it clear the rebalancing of 'speed' in EVE was not part of his portfolio, and he merely offered a personal view

- I think that's great that CCP Dev are still prepared to do that, even if its not their specific area. To then twist CCP Greyscale's comments into a generic 'CCP Statement' is unrepresentative of what was actually said.

C.





Yeah, I tried to get that across in my post. You said it better though. :)

-Liang

Trevor Warps
Posted - 2008.10.07 20:04:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: BiggestT
BiggestTFail

Shadowsword
The Rough Riders
Ares Protectiva
Posted - 2008.10.07 20:25:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: BiggestT
In a nutshell, greyscale was saying that the reason their nerfing speed is nothing to do with balance/lack of counters etc, but the fact that EVERYONE fitted for speed. He had a b*tch about the zealot getting nano'd when its not sposed to (I lol'd).



Everyone fitting for speed is proof that speed is overpowered. But I agree that's a weak argument. It's a consequence, not a cause.

Zealots being nanoed is a relatively new thing. AFAIK is was very uncommon before rigs came out.

I don't nano mine, btw, and I'm still efficient in a fight.

Quote:

Then they talked about other boring stuff like ambulation and fanfest..

Now my opinion..
WTF ARE YOU THINKING??
Their whole reasoning is to remove the homogonisation of speed in EVE. This is just ****ing hilarious. YOU CAN NEVER REMOVE THE NEED FOR SPEED!

THE single reason ppl fit for speed is survivavability, If my CS has no mwd it will die to the first bubble, suck for aligning in roaming, fail at roaming tactics such as the need to reproach gates etc.



Seriously, you fail. Do you realise that a CS is a HEAVY ship? You ARE supposed to be vulnerable when aligning. You ARE supposed to take big risks of being caught when roaming in a big ship! And what the frack give you a right to say to a gate camper "Nay! You don't have the right to catch me!" If someone tackle you at a gate, kill it, you have the firepower for it, or die for your mistake of jumping into a camped gate in the first place!


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6

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