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 : ... 109 110 111 112 [113] 114 115 116 117 ... : last (144)

Author Topic

Malachon Draco
eXceeded
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:03:00 - [3361]
 

Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Malachon Draco
....All I see from you is bull**** and innuendo...

Your perfect argumentation skills at work again I see.

Please use a civil tone, and maybe try to read my post on the previous page?
You know the one where I laid out the REAL INGAME experience of our alliance against PL in Delve....

All your name-calling and misrepresentations about the supposed vulnerability of nano-gangs fall flat on their face when taken ingame as most people fighting against nano-gangs will testify......



I read it. You said that PL could align and warp so fast that it was no point in engaging. I don't see why you should be the primary authority on fighting small gangs of PvPers. I bet the likes of CVA got a lot more nanogangs roaming their space. You could see it with BRUCE. When we first engaged em they sucked at fighting nanoers. But you could see em learn step by step. I also said that any gang worth its salt can align and warp out as long as you pay attention. Nanos dont warp faster. So what is the difference? Any gang who wants to disengage fast can do so, it does not require nanos.

Tzrailasa
Tzrailasa Corp
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:05:00 - [3362]
 

Originally by: Commander Tigre
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Why should nano-gangs be immune to people defending?

Nobody said a nano gang was immune. It is on the other hand their choice whether or not to fight. All it takes is a rapier/huggin or curse/pilgram in a slower gang and all of a sudden that nano gang thinks real hard about fighting.

I chose this post to clarify again the main difference.

A nano-gang can escape almost unscathed even when they make (many) mistakes. A non-nano gang will pay for it.

That is THE imbalance that needs to be rectified, and which I'm pretty sure CCP is aware of.

Oh, and on the 'let players vote' entries...... A benevolent dictatorship (CCP) is always better than a bunch of special-interest groups throwing insults and demonising their opposition.....

Sorry to say, but bed is calling. Have to get to work early tomorrow.

sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:07:00 - [3363]
 

Originally by: Malachon Draco
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Malachon Draco
....All I see from you is bull**** and innuendo...

Your perfect argumentation skills at work again I see.

Please use a civil tone, and maybe try to read my post on the previous page?
You know the one where I laid out the REAL INGAME experience of our alliance against PL in Delve....

All your name-calling and misrepresentations about the supposed vulnerability of nano-gangs fall flat on their face when taken ingame as most people fighting against nano-gangs will testify......



I read it. You said that PL could align and warp so fast that it was no point in engaging. I don't see why you should be the primary authority on fighting small gangs of PvPers. I bet the likes of CVA got a lot more nanogangs roaming their space. You could see it with BRUCE. When we first engaged em they sucked at fighting nanoers. But you could see em learn step by step. I also said that any gang worth its salt can align and warp out as long as you pay attention. Nanos dont warp faster. So what is the difference? Any gang who wants to disengage fast can do so, it does not require nanos.



BE do it all the time and they fly ravens.

And i can assure you aside from wilds CNR efforts the standard BE raven fit aint nano.

Malachon Draco
eXceeded
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:07:00 - [3364]
 

Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Commander Tigre
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Why should nano-gangs be immune to people defending?

Nobody said a nano gang was immune. It is on the other hand their choice whether or not to fight. All it takes is a rapier/huggin or curse/pilgram in a slower gang and all of a sudden that nano gang thinks real hard about fighting.

I chose this post to clarify again the main difference.

A nano-gang can escape almost unscathed even when they make (many) mistakes. A non-nano gang will pay for it.

That is THE imbalance that needs to be rectified, and which I'm pretty sure CCP is aware of.

Oh, and on the 'let players vote' entries...... A benevolent dictatorship (CCP) is always better than a bunch of special-interest groups throwing insults and demonising their opposition.....

Sorry to say, but bed is calling. Have to get to work early tomorrow.



A non-nano gang who makes mistakes loses a pittance in isk. A nanogang who makes mistakes loses hundreds of millions per ship. Maybe it tolerates a few more mistakes, but any mistakes that cost a nanogang a ship, is vastly more expensive. Is that not a form of balance?

Markas Crais
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:07:00 - [3365]
 

Originally by: Tzrailasa


A nano-gang can escape almost unscathed even when they make (many) mistakes. A non-nano gang will pay for it.

That is THE imbalance that needs to be rectified, and which I'm pretty sure CCP is aware of.




Example?

Tzrailasa
Tzrailasa Corp
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:08:00 - [3366]
 

Originally by: Malachon Draco
Any gang who wants to disengage fast can do so, it does not require nanos.

The point, which you're conveniently forgetting, is that nano's can get out WITHOUT being aligned.
A small press of that MWD button and you're out of warp scrambling range before your enemies can get you locked. You can then align and warp out.....

Haakelen
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:09:00 - [3367]
 

Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Any gang who wants to disengage fast can do so, it does not require nanos.

The point, which you're conveniently forgetting, is that nano's can get out WITHOUT being aligned.
A small press of that MWD button and you're out of warp scrambling range before your enemies can get you locked. You can then align and warp out.....



What nanos are you flying? My Ishtar and Sacrilege (All T2, T1 rigs, no implants, accel 4) were never fast enough for that trick, and they certainly won't be even CLOSE now.

Markas Crais
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:09:00 - [3368]
 

Originally by: Malachon Draco
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Commander Tigre
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Why should nano-gangs be immune to people defending?

Nobody said a nano gang was immune. It is on the other hand their choice whether or not to fight. All it takes is a rapier/huggin or curse/pilgram in a slower gang and all of a sudden that nano gang thinks real hard about fighting.

I chose this post to clarify again the main difference.

A nano-gang can escape almost unscathed even when they make (many) mistakes. A non-nano gang will pay for it.

That is THE imbalance that needs to be rectified, and which I'm pretty sure CCP is aware of.

Oh, and on the 'let players vote' entries...... A benevolent dictatorship (CCP) is always better than a bunch of special-interest groups throwing insults and demonising their opposition.....

Sorry to say, but bed is calling. Have to get to work early tomorrow.



A non-nano gang who makes mistakes loses a pittance in isk. A nanogang who makes mistakes loses hundreds of millions per ship. Maybe it tolerates a few more mistakes, but any mistakes that cost a nanogang a ship, is vastly more expensive. Is that not a form of balance?



I agree, it's risk vs. reward. You pay all that isk to have a ship that'll give you an advantage. Where is the fun in making everyone equal? Why bother having SP at all if we're just going to nerf everyone to an even playing field? If I wanted that I'd go play some FPS.

sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:10:00 - [3369]
 

Originally by: Tzrailasa



A nano-gang can escape almost unscathed even when they make (many) mistakes.






Only if the ppl they are flying against suck or its a 1 mistake insta pop for any nano ship that makes a mistake in combat against any sized gang.

RuneTday
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:10:00 - [3370]
 

Notice that most of the anti nano comments are from the same place, BOB. Yes nano gangs run rings around the 300 max caps, but what about the fighters from the caps. BOB intentionally overloads the system so nobody has any skill, just the biggest fleet will have enough sheer numbers somebody can shoot. In the real world hit and run tactics have always had a high level of success. Maybe CCP should add a maxi limit of ships from any allinace into a system to 30 ships, that would bring balance. Consider that CCP. If you need to nerf do it to the extreme, 10k+ people, get rid of the snakes and make polies cheaper but only 15% adjustment. Very, very few nano gangs are anywhere near the 10K speed. I am trying to get my Rapier over 3kms with out the poly or snakes... cost too much for my budget. The game has a multitude of differences. Get rid of the very top of the speed, leave the bulk were they are and can the scram and web changes. Minmatar, recon pilot.

Markas Crais
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:11:00 - [3371]
 

Edited by: Markas Crais on 28/07/2008 22:12:46
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Any gang who wants to disengage fast can do so, it does not require nanos.

The point, which you're conveniently forgetting, is that nano's can get out WITHOUT being aligned.
A small press of that MWD button and you're out of warp scrambling range before your enemies can get you locked. You can then align and warp out.....



A small press of that cloak button... blah blah blah. It's all the same thing. So we should completely get rid of MWD because people are able to get out of range? Or should we just have infinite range warp scrams?

Tzrailasa
Tzrailasa Corp
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:11:00 - [3372]
 

Originally by: Malachon Draco
A non-nano gang who makes mistakes loses a pittance in isk. A nanogang who makes mistakes loses hundreds of millions per ship. Maybe it tolerates a few more mistakes, but any mistakes that cost a nanogang a ship, is vastly more expensive. Is that not a form of balance?

A properly fitted non-nano HAC also costs at least 150m.... not really a valid argument......

Haakelen
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:12:00 - [3373]
 

Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Malachon Draco
A non-nano gang who makes mistakes loses a pittance in isk. A nanogang who makes mistakes loses hundreds of millions per ship. Maybe it tolerates a few more mistakes, but any mistakes that cost a nanogang a ship, is vastly more expensive. Is that not a form of balance?

A properly fitted non-nano HAC also costs at least 150m.... not really a valid argument......


Why would you fly a non-nano HAC when you could use a Tier 2 BC?

Commander Tigre
Minmatar
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:12:00 - [3374]
 

Edited by: Commander Tigre on 28/07/2008 22:15:37
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Commander Tigre
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Why should nano-gangs be immune to people defending?

Nobody said a nano gang was immune. It is on the other hand their choice whether or not to fight. All it takes is a rapier/huggin or curse/pilgram in a slower gang and all of a sudden that nano gang thinks real hard about fighting.

I chose this post to clarify again the main difference.

A nano-gang can escape almost unscathed even when they make (many) mistakes. A non-nano gang will pay for it.




I must argue that a nano gang PAYS far more if they loose their ships. That is the balance that everyone is forgetting. IT COSTS MONEY to fit ships to get to certain standards. It is true that some people have far to much money and they spend it buying really really nice stuff. Then people b**** when they cannot catch the 15km/s ceptor. No kidding, that ship cost over 2 billion to make. Don't whine because a 50 mill T2 fitted ship cant do anything against it.

Oniko Sengir
Coreli Corporation
Naraka.
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:13:00 - [3375]
 

Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Markas Crais
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Nowhere else in EVE is a single very specialised ship class from a single race required to combat a very widely used tactic! Neither should it be so here!

You forget that MOST recons can still combat a nano ship. A Curse works pretty damn well against most nanos. So does a Falcon. How can you claim only one race's specialized ship can combat against a certain play style when you know that isn't true. Sure, a Rapier/Huginn is more effective but it is not the only ship.

No, I didn't. You however did not catch the main argument.

The nano-ships are already gone before the above mentioned ships can lock and engage. That is the whole point.

I see no reason why nano-fitting a ships should mean you can disengage from fights without risk when other types of ships can't. It takes away variety because it makes one tactic (nano'ing) so much less risky than other tactics, thus hurting variety in the game (because everyone wants to fly nano..).

Taking away variety is NEVER a good idea.



I wasn't with PL at the time you're speaking of. But I do know that what you're describing has nothing to do with nanos. Warping out as an enemy gang warps in is not what a nano-gang is good at. Using a Zealot as example, since it's what I fly, a standard setup will warp at 7.5 seconds, a nano setup will warp 2 seconds faster at 5.5 or if you have the MWD running, it will take a much longer time than a normal ship to get into warp.

Malachon Draco
eXceeded
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:15:00 - [3376]
 

Originally by: Haakelen
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Malachon Draco
A non-nano gang who makes mistakes loses a pittance in isk. A nanogang who makes mistakes loses hundreds of millions per ship. Maybe it tolerates a few more mistakes, but any mistakes that cost a nanogang a ship, is vastly more expensive. Is that not a form of balance?

A properly fitted non-nano HAC also costs at least 150m.... not really a valid argument......


Why would you fly a non-nano HAC when you could use a Tier 2 BC?


Exactly.

Motaka
Caldari
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:17:00 - [3377]
 

Originally by: XxAngelxX
To the raven pilot - Fit heavy neuts and you will kill a nano gang that outnumbers you, or at least cause them to run away. Kill drones with your drones, and fit a cap booster. Basically, fit for PVP.

To the rest - I've given up with this, I'm not coming on sisi for "testing" as it will no way resemble TQ. I've read the changes, I disagree with them. Fighters killing hacs, PVP will be more static now than ever.

Looking at a missile change? What.

Trying to fix a glass with a sledgehammer, gg CCP.


A typical 1 trick pony unable to adapt,goodluck in your next game you wont be missed.

CyrusXX
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:19:00 - [3378]
 

so this is the end of the uber minmatar?

speed is it's only power..

i hope moest ppl vote against

Markas Crais
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:19:00 - [3379]
 

Edited by: Markas Crais on 28/07/2008 22:20:04
Edited by: Markas Crais on 28/07/2008 22:19:52
Originally by: Motaka
Originally by: XxAngelxX
To the raven pilot - Fit heavy neuts and you will kill a nano gang that outnumbers you, or at least cause them to run away. Kill drones with your drones, and fit a cap booster. Basically, fit for PVP.

To the rest - I've given up with this, I'm not coming on sisi for "testing" as it will no way resemble TQ. I've read the changes, I disagree with them. Fighters killing hacs, PVP will be more static now than ever.

Looking at a missile change? What.

Trying to fix a glass with a sledgehammer, gg CCP.


A typical 1 trick pony unable to adapt,goodluck in your next game you wont be missed.



I hate when people say that others can't adapt. People have been killing Nanos for a long time now, if you can't kill them then you haven't adapted either.

Adapt is not a valid argument.

Oniko Sengir
Coreli Corporation
Naraka.
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:20:00 - [3380]
 

Originally by: Motaka
Originally by: XxAngelxX
To the raven pilot - Fit heavy neuts and you will kill a nano gang that outnumbers you, or at least cause them to run away. Kill drones with your drones, and fit a cap booster. Basically, fit for PVP.

To the rest - I've given up with this, I'm not coming on sisi for "testing" as it will no way resemble TQ. I've read the changes, I disagree with them. Fighters killing hacs, PVP will be more static now than ever.

Looking at a missile change? What.

Trying to fix a glass with a sledgehammer, gg CCP.


A typical 1 trick pony unable to adapt,goodluck in your next game you wont be missed.


Was that irony? What do you have to say to the one-trick ravens?

Aenis Veros
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:22:00 - [3381]
 

Edited by: Aenis Veros on 28/07/2008 22:22:58
So those for this patch, do you agree with this:

1. A force that greatly outnumbers another should most oftenly win.
2. A force that greatly outnumbers another should most oftenly stop their target from leaving the battle.
3. A force that greatly outnumbers another should be able to lock down one gate.

Let's say we have twenty ships on a bottleneck gate:

2 x Arazu
2 x Huginn
2 x Falcon
6 x Drake
1 x Taranis
1 x Crow
1 x Curse
5 x Megathron


Scenario A is current Tranq-mechanics, Scenario B is Sisi-mechanics:

Our 5 man nano gang (Huginn, Rapier, Falcon, Ishtar, Vagabond) jumps into the bottleneck gate:

A) Small gang leader realizes that this fight is impossible to win, and tells his group to speed-align and warp off.
B) Small gang leader realizes that this fight is impossible to win, and tells his group to speed-align and warp off. However, speed increase is too small to get out of range, MWD gets disabled, 3 of the "nano-ships" get destroyed.

Under no circumstance can the smaller gang engage the bigger, despite of how uber the current nano-mechanics are. The speed pretty much only guarantees an ability to get the hell out of dodge, an ability that with scenario B gets greatly reduced. Scenario A is still very risky for our 5 man gang. Most would probably not jump through, but at least if we handle things right we can. Scenario B is pretty much a sure-shot way of stopping the 5 man group. They either will have to take a longer route, die, or go do something different.

The thing is, "the blob" of today, with a well setup gang can still handle nano-gangs. Minmatar recons, ECM, etc. is required, but wasn't the argument that there should be more options for tactics? If there is only one way to evade large numbers in 0.0, nano, then the problem isn't nano. The problem is that there are too few options available for small gangs.

Naturally most "huge" alliances disagree. Because having this speed-option available means problems. While removing it is in favour of them. No longer can a 5 man gang get into those precious ratting-systems and kill unprepared ratters, no longer can the enemy evade a capital hot-drop simply by speeding away. This is of course perfect for a 1000 man alliance, protecting 0.0 is made easier.

I think the mentality from CCP here is a simple one, they've resolved the rock-paper bag-scissors game by (simplified) removing the paper bag. Naturally everyone who favours the rock is going to love this change, but not so much fun if you favour the scissors.

The mentality should instead be to add to this game, increase the number of options of waging war. Which the current solution says it does, but does NOT.

This is the one fatal flaw of the current SiSi-implementation. Saying that you want more tactical options is one thing, doing it is another. As it is with Sisi in it's current form we will see less tactics applied and more of the same old "numbers solves the problem".

How this type of patch can go through in a game previously reknowned for it's 'hard core'-sandbox mentality I don't know. But I guess in a way it reduces the load on the database when more and more people realize that 0.0 warfare is supposed to be clinging together in big groups and fighting until the nodes crash.

A step in the very wrong direction, in this EVE-players humble opinion.


Barsexual
Castle Greyskull
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:23:00 - [3382]
 

Edited by: Barsexual on 28/07/2008 22:24:52
Originally by: Natalia Kovac
Originally by: Barsexual
Edited by: Barsexual on 28/07/2008 16:43:23
ran some tests with a stopwatch... with complete removal of mass reduction bonus from mods and 1,590,000 mass increase on the Vagabond:

6-7 seconds to reach 5800m/s on Tranq
16-17 seconds to reach 3200m/sec on Sisi

Add 10 second mwd reactivation delay for taste


http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c36/MyHovercraft/bleedingeyes.png

Tbh.


do you see me crying *****?

Inflexible
Shokei
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:24:00 - [3383]
 

Originally by: Haakelen
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Malachon Draco
A non-nano gang who makes mistakes loses a pittance in isk. A nanogang who makes mistakes loses hundreds of millions per ship. Maybe it tolerates a few more mistakes, but any mistakes that cost a nanogang a ship, is vastly more expensive. Is that not a form of balance?

A properly fitted non-nano HAC also costs at least 150m.... not really a valid argument......


Why would you fly a non-nano HAC when you could use a Tier 2 BC?

Did you just say that non-nano HAC is useless?

Haakelen
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:25:00 - [3384]
 

Edited by: Haakelen on 28/07/2008 22:25:45
Originally by: Aenis Veros
A step in the very wrong direction, in this EVE-players humble opinion.


Read the quotes from the dev in the other thread. This is now Caldari Blob online, and us silly little PvPers who hold out any hope for meaningful asymmetric combat should shut the **** up, apparently.

Originally by: Inflexible
Did you just say that non-nano HAC is useless?

I sure did. There's about three or four exceptions (four if you count alternate fitting strategies of the same ship), but one of those is a feeble exploit at best.

Commander Tigre
Minmatar
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:25:00 - [3385]
 

Originally by: Aenis Veros
Edited by: Aenis Veros on 28/07/2008 22:22:58
So those for this patch, do you agree with this:

1. A force that greatly outnumbers another should most oftenly win.
2. A force that greatly outnumbers another should most oftenly stop their target from leaving the battle.
3. A force that greatly outnumbers another should be able to lock down one gate.

Let's say we have twenty ships on a bottleneck gate:

2 x Arazu
2 x Huginn
2 x Falcon
6 x Drake
1 x Taranis
1 x Crow
1 x Curse
5 x Megathron


Scenario A is current Tranq-mechanics, Scenario B is Sisi-mechanics:

Our 5 man nano gang (Huginn, Rapier, Falcon, Ishtar, Vagabond) jumps into the bottleneck gate:

A) Small gang leader realizes that this fight is impossible to win, and tells his group to speed-align and warp off.
B) Small gang leader realizes that this fight is impossible to win, and tells his group to speed-align and warp off. However, speed increase is too small to get out of range, MWD gets disabled, 3 of the "nano-ships" get destroyed.

Under no circumstance can the smaller gang engage the bigger, despite of how uber the current nano-mechanics are. The speed pretty much only guarantees an ability to get the hell out of dodge, an ability that with scenario B gets greatly reduced. Scenario A is still very risky for our 5 man gang. Most would probably not jump through, but at least if we handle things right we can. Scenario B is pretty much a sure-shot way of stopping the 5 man group. They either will have to take a longer route, die, or go do something different.

The thing is, "the blob" of today, with a well setup gang can still handle nano-gangs. Minmatar recons, ECM, etc. is required, but wasn't the argument that there should be more options for tactics? If there is only one way to evade large numbers in 0.0, nano, then the problem isn't nano. The problem is that there are too few options available for small gangs.

Naturally most "huge" alliances disagree. Because having this speed-option available means problems. While removing it is in favour of them. No longer can a 5 man gang get into those precious ratting-systems and kill unprepared ratters, no longer can the enemy evade a capital hot-drop simply by speeding away. This is of course perfect for a 1000 man alliance, protecting 0.0 is made easier.

I think the mentality from CCP here is a simple one, they've resolved the rock-paper bag-scissors game by (simplified) removing the paper bag. Naturally everyone who favours the rock is going to love this change, but not so much fun if you favour the scissors.

The mentality should instead be to add to this game, increase the number of options of waging war. Which the current solution says it does, but does NOT.

This is the one fatal flaw of the current SiSi-implementation. Saying that you want more tactical options is one thing, doing it is another. As it is with Sisi in it's current form we will see less tactics applied and more of the same old "numbers solves the problem".

How this type of patch can go through in a game previously reknowned for it's 'hard core'-sandbox mentality I don't know. But I guess in a way it reduces the load on the database when more and more people realize that 0.0 warfare is supposed to be clinging together in big groups and fighting until the nodes crash.

A step in the very wrong direction, in this EVE-players humble opinion.



agreed.

sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:27:00 - [3386]
 

Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 28/07/2008 22:30:24


Originally by: Aenis Veros

So those for this patch, do you agree with this:

1. A force that greatly outnumbers another should most oftenly win.
2. A force that greatly outnumbers another should most oftenly stop their target from leaving the battle.
3. A force that greatly outnumbers another should be able to lock down one gate.


Pilot skill, fittings, ship types, in gang team work skill's and FCing skill are a huge factor so, MAYBE it depends on the list i just gave you.

Also the scenario you gave if this stupid patch goes through will never happen as the non nano gang will not ever jump through to a camp like that as it would be suicide instead of just very risky.


Guam
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:29:00 - [3387]
 

Originally by: Inflexible
Originally by: Haakelen
Originally by: Tzrailasa
Originally by: Malachon Draco
A non-nano gang who makes mistakes loses a pittance in isk. A nanogang who makes mistakes loses hundreds of millions per ship. Maybe it tolerates a few more mistakes, but any mistakes that cost a nanogang a ship, is vastly more expensive. Is that not a form of balance?

A properly fitted non-nano HAC also costs at least 150m.... not really a valid argument......


Why would you fly a non-nano HAC when you could use a Tier 2 BC?

Did you just say that non-nano HAC is useless?


Its obsolete. It can do some stuff, but for just about everything, a Tier 2 BC will be better.

Inflexible
Shokei
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:31:00 - [3388]
 

Originally by: Haakelen

Originally by: Inflexible
Did you just say that non-nano HAC is useless?

I sure did. There's about three or four exceptions (four if you count alternate fitting strategies of the same ship), but one of those is a feeble exploit at best.

Don't you think that fact there is ONLY one useful way to do things (fit ships in this case) is quite wrong?

Aenis Veros
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:31:00 - [3389]
 

Originally by: Tzrailasa

A nano-gang can escape almost unscathed even when they make (many) mistakes. A non-nano gang will pay for it.



If you, like BOB does a lot. Fly with 200 people, then of course you will be more sluggish and not have an as easy option to get the hell out of dodge.

But when you fly with tops 8 people all the time, you have to be mobile to survive. Removing that mobility doesn't solve "the problem", it just creates another.

But if those 8 people don't pick nano-ships then? Then what? Well, of course they can bring half falcons and jam the living crap out of a bigger gang. While using 4 damage ships to take their targets out. Maybe this is what's going to happen then for those who fly in smaller groups. Tons of falcons instead. Guess what you will want to nerf next?

Haakelen
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.07.28 22:32:00 - [3390]
 

Originally by: Inflexible
Originally by: Haakelen

Originally by: Inflexible
Did you just say that non-nano HAC is useless?

I sure did. There's about three or four exceptions (four if you count alternate fitting strategies of the same ship), but one of those is a feeble exploit at best.

Don't you think that fact there is ONLY one useful way to do things (fit ships in this case) is quite wrong?


I certainly do. The fact that the only real way to fit HACs is nano is not the fault of the HACs or the nano pilots, it's the fault of the server, CCP, and blobbing. Treat the disease, not the symptom, etc.


Pages: first : previous : ... 109 110 111 112 [113] 114 115 116 117 ... : 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