open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Is there really going to be a speed nerf?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic

Jack Target
Astral Adventure
Posted - 2007.12.28 04:58:00 - [1]
 

Is there really going to be a speed nerf or is this just a rumour? Can someone provide a link to the dev blog that says this nerf might happen?

I like fast ships, so I'm hoping there will not be a nerf.

Ariel Dawn
Posted - 2007.12.28 05:04:00 - [2]
 

Doubt it, or if so not a serious one.

People just whine about whatever everyone else is complaining about; before there was the 'problem' of people going AFK in their systems while cloaked so they were too scared to rat. Huge threads, now almost non-existent despite no changes made.

I wouldn't worry about it, they'll find something new soon.

Wu Jiun
State War Academy
Posted - 2007.12.28 05:06:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Wu Jiun on 28/12/2007 05:07:20
I think i heard people talking about the live dev blog. Maybe it was mentioned there!?

But just looking at the last year and a half or so:

ecm whines->ecm nerf
nos whines->nos nerf
damp whines->damp nerf, td nerf, nerf this and that
drone whines->drone nerf
speed whines-> ?

Well it strikes me as obvious. Speed will get nerfed no matter what the devs tell you now. Good thing is they just boosted ecm and torps so once speed is nerfed there is already the next nerf on the agenda...

I am not saying all those changes were bad or uncalled for its just they coincide pretty well with the mass-whines on the forums.

shinsushi
Posted - 2007.12.28 05:19:00 - [4]
 

I would bet they will nerf speed. CCP once said that eve isn't about twitch combat (the first nano-nerf) and that they do not like seeing ships that do not commit to combat (the WCS nerf).

I hope they just nerf the hell out of implants and gang-links though. As I see it, if you take those out of the equation things aren't nearly as bad as they appear.

A fully T2 vaga w/ polys, 2x OD IIs and 1 x nano II only goes 5.8 km/sec.

IDK, maybe the problem is more in the amount of Boost MWDs give, or the lack of signature increase they penalize.

Either way, if I was a betting man I would bet that something will be effected. OF course if this effects what you are training, your just a FotM ***** anyway and I don't think anyone cares about the whine.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.12.28 05:22:00 - [5]
 

they won't nerf it they will change the way it works.

which people will call a nerf.

and whine about.

while the rest of us will relised that faster ships will go slower and yet be even better at not getting hit.

then once everyone figures this out people will whine about speed again and they will change it again.

and people will whine thinking ou can't go fast anymore.

but us smart players will know better and adapt.

and then everyone will figure out how to do it again.

so people will whine.

and they will nerf once more.

thus is eve :)

Admiral Pelleon
White Shadow Imperium
Posted - 2007.12.28 05:25:00 - [6]
 

Moon your sig.

It keeps changing!

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.12.28 05:28:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: MotherMoon on 28/12/2007 05:29:03
Originally by: Admiral Pelleon
Moon your sig.

It keeps changing!


muhahahaha

wait for my full sig I'm working on.

wait unless you mean quick rapid like?

F'nog
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2007.12.28 05:43:00 - [8]
 

I think changing speed so that the higher-limit ones aren't so easy to achieve while not effecting the low end at all is a good idea. Whether CCP will screw this up is another thing.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.12.28 05:44:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: F'nog
I think changing speed so that the higher-limit ones aren't so easy to achieve while not effecting the low end at all is a good idea. Whether CCP will screw this up is another thing.


right I for one am very afraid I will lose my effective cheaper set ups.


shinsushi
Posted - 2007.12.28 05:51:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: shinsushi on 28/12/2007 05:59:46
I just want a working counter to everything in the game. Not a OMG 1 module counter 100, just a reasonable counter thats widely available.

ECM has it, RSDs have it, TDs have it, Tanking has it, ganking has it, drones have it, speedtanking above 13km doesn't have it, and speed tanking under 13 km has a OMGOVERPOWERED counter. Thats my issue.


EQUINAX
Minmatar
ECLIPTIC HORIZON
Posted - 2007.12.28 05:51:00 - [11]
 

The only MWD's that should exist in game are the 1MN ones. It's more practical for frigate class ships to have speed, everything else should have enough range or use an afterburner to get there while the frigate holds down the target.

shinsushi
Posted - 2007.12.28 06:17:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: EQUINAX
The only MWD's that should exist in game are the 1MN ones. It's more practical for frigate class ships to have speed, everything else should have enough range or use an afterburner to get there while the frigate holds down the target.


I don't think I can agree with this.

Blasterboats live and die by MWDs, as do minnie ships. I could stand by a reduction in MWD efficiency as they move up in size, but to completely anhilate them would be to destroy a number of play methods, and thats not a good thing.

umop 3pisdn
Minmatar
Fnck the blob.
Posted - 2007.12.28 06:53:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: umop 3pisdn on 28/12/2007 06:56:32
Originally by: shinsushi
Originally by: EQUINAX
The only MWD's that should exist in game are the 1MN ones. It's more practical for frigate class ships to have speed, everything else should have enough range or use an afterburner to get there while the frigate holds down the target.


I don't think I can agree with this.

Blasterboats live and die by MWDs, as do minnie ships. I could stand by a reduction in MWD efficiency as they move up in size, but to completely anhilate them would be to destroy a number of play methods, and thats not a good thing.


MWDs on bs's are pretty essential but comparing 2 bs, 1 with and 1 without an MWD you can see that they are already quite harsh to fit.

And yes, speed will be nerfed, the whines say so, the devs just nerd the flavor of the month.

The drakes still a wee bit too tanky, but the myrm (which coincidentally, can have trouble scratching a drake) got the nerf, why? because you dont see that many drakes ganking people and the carebear majority love their drakes.

So the whines are basically eve vs caldari.

EQUINAX
Minmatar
ECLIPTIC HORIZON
Posted - 2007.12.28 07:07:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: EQUINAX on 28/12/2007 07:07:20
Originally by: shinsushi
Originally by: EQUINAX
The only MWD's that should exist in game are the 1MN ones. It's more practical for frigate class ships to have speed, everything else should have enough range or use an afterburner to get there while the frigate holds down the target.


I don't think I can agree with this.

Blasterboats live and die by MWDs, as do minnie ships. I could stand by a reduction in MWD efficiency as they move up in size, but to completely anhilate them would be to destroy a number of play methods, and thats not a good thing.


How about just changing ammo according to how far from the target you are?

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.12.28 07:08:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: EQUINAX
Edited by: EQUINAX on 28/12/2007 07:07:20
Originally by: shinsushi
Originally by: EQUINAX
The only MWD's that should exist in game are the 1MN ones. It's more practical for frigate class ships to have speed, everything else should have enough range or use an afterburner to get there while the frigate holds down the target.


I don't think I can agree with this.

Blasterboats live and die by MWDs, as do minnie ships. I could stand by a reduction in MWD efficiency as they move up in size, but to completely anhilate them would be to destroy a number of play methods, and thats not a good thing.


How about just changing ammo according to how far from the target you are?


or changing sripts? they only take a second to change you can use the tracking one when close and the optimal range one where far away.

Hannobaal
Gallente
Punic Corp.
Posted - 2007.12.28 07:12:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: EQUINAX
Edited by: EQUINAX on 28/12/2007 07:07:20
Originally by: shinsushi
Originally by: EQUINAX
The only MWD's that should exist in game are the 1MN ones. It's more practical for frigate class ships to have speed, everything else should have enough range or use an afterburner to get there while the frigate holds down the target.


I don't think I can agree with this.

Blasterboats live and die by MWDs, as do minnie ships. I could stand by a reduction in MWD efficiency as they move up in size, but to completely anhilate them would be to destroy a number of play methods, and thats not a good thing.


How about just changing ammo according to how far from the target you are?


What range do you imagine you can get with blasters using the longest range ammo?

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.12.28 07:13:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Hannobaal
Originally by: EQUINAX
Edited by: EQUINAX on 28/12/2007 07:07:20
Originally by: shinsushi
Originally by: EQUINAX
The only MWD's that should exist in game are the 1MN ones. It's more practical for frigate class ships to have speed, everything else should have enough range or use an afterburner to get there while the frigate holds down the target.


I don't think I can agree with this.

Blasterboats live and die by MWDs, as do minnie ships. I could stand by a reduction in MWD efficiency as they move up in size, but to completely anhilate them would be to destroy a number of play methods, and thats not a good thing.


How about just changing ammo according to how far from the target you are?


What range do you imagine you can get with blasters using the longest range ammo?


SEE that's why I had my idea for assuslt ships to get a 500% increase to optimal range for blasters only.
or auto cannons.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.12.28 08:38:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: shinsushi
A fully T2 vaga w/ polys, 2x OD IIs and 1 x nano II only goes 5.8 km/sec.



Now add in implants and gang bonuses (not sure how fast that is but a fair bit faster).

My sense is the speed nerf will come in the form of more/worse stacking penalties. I could be wrong about that though so don't quote me.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.12.28 08:48:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: shinsushi
A fully T2 vaga w/ polys, 2x OD IIs and 1 x nano II only goes 5.8 km/sec.



Now add in implants and gang bonuses (not sure how fast that is but a fair bit faster).

My sense is the speed nerf will come in the form of more/worse stacking penalties. I could be wrong about that though so don't quote me.


don't forget nano pump rigs.

10 more speed with snakes I think about

so about 6.5m/s there.

gang bonus to after burner

up to 7.5 m/s

rig will get that up to 9m/s

over heat for another 3000 m/s


Jaketh Ivanes
Amarr
House of El
Posted - 2007.12.28 08:54:00 - [20]
 

If i remember correctly, MWD's was supposed to be used to close the gap between you and the enemy quickly. As it stands, it is often used as a tank, but orbiting at high speeds.

I think the simplest solution to this "problem", is to add an agility penalty when activated. So a vaga can go 6km/s, but can't turn. Blaster boats will not really be affected, as they usually don't want the MWD to continue when they are in range.

Anyways, I think its a simple solution if CCP wants a speed nerf.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.12.28 08:56:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
If i remember correctly, MWD's was supposed to be used to close the gap between you and the enemy quickly. As it stands, it is often used as a tank, but orbiting at high speeds.

I think the simplest solution to this "problem", is to add an agility penalty when activated. So a vaga can go 6km/s, but can't turn. Blaster boats will not really be affected, as they usually don't want the MWD to continue when they are in range.

Anyways, I think its a simple solution if CCP wants a speed nerf.


good point, the whole increase in sig radius is suppose to make them easier to hit.

but it's gone so far it doesn't work out that way.

J Valkor
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2007.12.28 08:56:00 - [22]
 

Expect a change to how speed stacks and possibly how the MWD works. Interceptors should see the least change but as you get into larger vessels see them become more pronounced.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.12.28 08:57:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: J Valkor
Expect a change to how speed stacks and possibly how the MWD works. Interceptors should see the least change but as you get into larger vessels see them become more pronounced.


hopefully they will boost after burners a bit maybe while giving a big reason to not keep a MWD now.

J Valkor
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2007.12.28 08:59:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: MotherMoon
Originally by: J Valkor
Expect a change to how speed stacks and possibly how the MWD works. Interceptors should see the least change but as you get into larger vessels see them become more pronounced.


hopefully they will boost after burners a bit maybe while giving a big reason to not keep a MWD now.



Hopefully. Just expect about a billion threads complaining about the change. I despise any mod becoming "necessary."

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.12.28 09:07:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: J Valkor
Originally by: MotherMoon
Originally by: J Valkor
Expect a change to how speed stacks and possibly how the MWD works. Interceptors should see the least change but as you get into larger vessels see them become more pronounced.


hopefully they will boost after burners a bit maybe while giving a big reason to not keep a MWD now.



Hopefully. Just expect about a billion threads complaining about the change. I despise any mod becoming "necessary."


if afterburners gave even 50% more boost with MWD getting a boost even too but they could like only let you almost go nothing but in a straight line.
then it would be cool because fast ships could still run away maybe even better at it and smallers ships could move a "safe" speeds without the huge increase to sig radius.


F'nog
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2007.12.28 09:16:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: MotherMoon
Originally by: J Valkor
Expect a change to how speed stacks and possibly how the MWD works. Interceptors should see the least change but as you get into larger vessels see them become more pronounced.


hopefully they will boost after burners a bit maybe while giving a big reason to not keep a MWD now.



Now this I have to laugh at. ABs used to give a 40% bonus or so. It was increased a while back so you could actually notice when one was used. It was at the same time ABs and MWDs couldn't both be activated on the same ship.

So I don't necessarily think ABs need a boost.

It's the ultra-high end people doing several km/s in a BS that need looking at.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.12.28 09:20:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: F'nog
Originally by: MotherMoon
Originally by: J Valkor
Expect a change to how speed stacks and possibly how the MWD works. Interceptors should see the least change but as you get into larger vessels see them become more pronounced.


hopefully they will boost after burners a bit maybe while giving a big reason to not keep a MWD now.



Now this I have to laugh at. ABs used to give a 40% bonus or so. It was increased a while back so you could actually notice when one was used. It was at the same time ABs and MWDs couldn't both be activated on the same ship.

So I don't necessarily think ABs need a boost.

It's the ultra-high end people doing several km/s in a BS that need looking at.


true

muffminer
Posted - 2007.12.28 10:13:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: muffminer on 28/12/2007 10:33:58
this topic kinda makes me sick.

People aren't complaining about the speed of a non-rigged, non-implanted ship? Why? because apparently the people complaining never put the isk or time into it to obtain such speeds.

I'm sorry...but if i spend 1-4billion on a full set of implants...and throw 100 mil in rigs and mods to fit my ship...WHY ON ***KING EARTH should someone who DIDN't put that kind of isk, which takes time and effort to produce, be able to "easily" take the person who did out?

my unrigged stiletto does 6.5km...i could probably spend 16 mil on crap auxilary thruster I'' and put it in that ship and could tackle any vaga with 1bil in imps...frkkn cheaparse whiners.

a charactor SPECIALIZED for his ship that he spent possibly billions to spec for should be able to smoke or avoid a pilot who spread his training out and doesn't want to risk the frikkin hours and hours of time they spent putting their ship and charactor together.

GET OVER IT.

*edit* - a polycarb'd ceptor w/ more than 2 mid slots and a totally unrigged rapier using fleeting webbers could easily work together to tackle/get a sling on/hold in place a vaga pilot with snake imps. ..and here lets throw in the msot expensive dictor the sabre at a whopping 35-40 mil...totally unrigged...here's a simple equation showing that less isk beat more isk. and skills and tactics win the day here -
3 ships - apprx 300mil if setup as i stated using t2 mods and the ceptor the only one using rigs and no fancy implants between the 3 at all.
1 ship = approx 2billion isk between implants, faction and tech2 mods , and rigs.

300mil could easily beatdown that expensive vaga and even drop a bubble to rob him of his 1bil+ in implants.

And i hope everybody see's this..there's not a need for a nerf on speed

THere's a need for players to be patient..train skills..and be willing to possibly spend as much isk as their enemy.

For all those opposed...I'll be opening my cheese factory soon...should be a good business with all this whine. *end edit*

Lt Angus
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2007.12.28 10:19:00 - [29]
 

They already nerfed speed multiple times, now everything is slow

Venus Felix
Posted - 2007.12.28 10:38:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: muffminer
this topic kinda makes me sick.

People aren't complaining about the speed of a non-rigged, non-implanted ship? Why? because apparently the people complaining never put the isk or time into it to obtain such speeds.

I'm sorry...but if i spend 1-4billion on a full set of implants...and throw 100 mil in rigs and mods to fit my ship...WHY ON ***KING EARTH should someone who DIDN't put that kind of isk, which takes time and effort to produce, be able to "easily" take the person who did out?

my unrigged stiletto does 6.5km...i could probably spend 16 mil on crap auxilary thruster I'' and put it in that ship and could tackle any vaga with 1bil in imps...frkkn cheaparse whiners.

a charactor SPECIALIZED for his ship that he spent possibly billions to spec for should be able to smoke or avoid a pilot who spread his training out and doesn't want to risk the frikkin hours and hours of time they spent putting their ship and charactor together.

GET OVER IT.


Now this is just stupid.

My problem is that there isn't anything short of capitals that I can spend that kind of money on that isn't a speed-setup, at least if you want it to be a half-way survivable setup. Sure, I could spend a few bil on a Rokh with Pith-X booster and a Crystal set but that is still dead as soon as you run into a 5-man gang with decent setups.

I don't like speedy ships but if you give me a multi billion gank or tank setup, that can avoid fights that I don't like the way a snaked-up Vaga can, then you can keep your snakes.

Snakes are expensive b/c they are over-powered, not the other way around.


Pages: [1] 2 3

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