open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Open letter to CCP - a serious response to the nano changes
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5

Author Topic

Baudolino
Gallente
Royal Crimson Lancers
Posted - 2008.07.31 11:52:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Baudolino on 31/07/2008 18:05:11
CCP

I`ve read the dev blog, i`ve thought about your proposals and i believe i understand the frame of mind in which these ideas were thought out.

I have played this game since the very beginning, i have seen all expansions and just about all the patches. I`ve played the game since there was no stacking and frigates fielded cruise missiles and battleships fitted 5x MWDs. I was there before "orbit" and indeed suggested it to CCP myself.

I believe that EVE today is caught in a limbo somewhere between tech II and tech III. Caught in a move in which "heat" and "combat boosters" are to be the next great thing in combat. As features central to tech III have been unleashed before the tech branch itself, we have a situation in wich non-stacking bonuses create the speeds you state to be insane- and a change is required or when tech III is introduced things will really get "insane".

I do however believe that you are in your changes also contemplating a sad mistake based on dangerous misconceptions.

I am of course talking about "nano".
(I have previously written about nano tactics which can be viewed following this Link)
I will in the following, where necessary use terms presented in that post.

"Nano" constitutes a space that is ill-defined and poorly understood. As a consequence any intervention can never be based on anything but lack of understanding, which in it`s furthest consequence can be detrimental.
There is no clear definition of what constitutes a "nano" ship- frequently people believe a ship is "nano" as long as it has some speed increasing modules on it and just as frequently turn to ships flying 15km/s to depict a ruinous fault in the game.

As i have previously stated, the game has 3 speeds: "max", "orbit" and "heated". The latter includes combat boosters and refers to temporary effects. In addition there are the gang bonuses which I`ll get back to.

The 15km/s ship relying on temporary effects will have a "max" speed somewhere around 9-10km/s and it`s "orbit" speed will be around 5-6km/s. The going mantra is that you need a ship flying 10km/s or faster to engage a 10km/s ship- nothing could be further from the truth- as i stated in the link above. This belief is thuroughly based on a lack of understanding of game mechanics and "nano" tactics.

I have previously defined "nano" as constituting ships flying at "max" speeds above 4.5km/s and this definition precludes 90% of the current so-called "nano" population. I use this speed because it is the speed required to effectively escape drones and missiles when entering "orbit" which speeds are significantly lower then "max", but "max" will and should always be the speed to which all others are compared. However it becomes dangerous when "max" speed is used to portray a reality in other situations in which it is not valid. It also becomes extremely dangerous when "heat/booster" speeds are referenced in a manner such as to cause confusion about what is "max" and what is a temporary effect.

I believe you are doing the same mistake you did when announcing a nerf to carriers (that was later rescinded), only this mistake is much greater. I see both mistakes as a possible indication of GMs and developers having less intimate knowledge of game mechanics then they had only 2 years ago. I see CCP relying in both cases on players with even less understanding of the mechanics they are discussing.

I believe EVE has evolved. I believe speed and the advanced gamestyle in it`s wake has been refreshing to eve and while some adaptations towards tech III are required and while extreme effects such as a Machariel doing 18km/s should be curtailed, the function and purpose of "nano" is valid and should not be removed.

-concluded in the next part-




Baudolino
Gallente
Royal Crimson Lancers
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:05:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Baudolino on 01/08/2008 16:56:13
Edited by: Baudolino on 01/08/2008 16:55:34
Edited by: Baudolino on 01/08/2008 16:52:21

Today the players of eve are playing two different games.

There are those i call "Starcraft" gamers and those whom i call "Total Annihilation" players. The former being the old "tank" and "gank" style of eve combat and the latter being the fast paced tactically demanding game the rest are playing.

Curtailing speed to the degree you are contemplating will relegate eve back to slow moving days of tank and gank where the battleships were kings and not fleet weapons, gate campers and PvE platforms as they are mostly used today.

That the "starcraft" gamers have issues and that "nano" is poorly understood, is a poor reason for removing an enire game feature.

Look into temporary effects and limit skirmish warfare bonuses to small gangs (5 or less)- and in addition maybe reduce the gang effect slightly.

But apapreciate that any "nano" debate is derailed by misconceptions and needs a proper framing before relying on playerbase objections.

I hope you take speed into a broader consideration, rather then curtailing speed in general.

Sincerely
Baudolino

Added:
True "nanos" allowed for rapid movement of gangs
High "max" speed allowed to escape bubbled gates and large gate-camps
In this sense and according to people opposing "nano" combat- "orbit" speed is of greater evil then "max" speed.

Also-

There will be no point in duel setups (both speed and tank) as speeds will be so low that fitting for it is pointless. If your "orbit" speed is only 1500ms and your max speed is only 2km/s there is no point in fitting for it since you will have no chance of escaping gatecamps, drones or missiles. Thus the option is to tank and go at eve's old speeds.

Cleary the changes favour larger alliances and big corporations over solo players and small gangs- two categories that already have a pretty tough time in EVE these days.


Second addition:
My current responses to posts can be found at intervals 31,85,

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:10:00 - [3]
 

You have it the wrong way around. Nano noobs are 'Starcraft', 'traditional' players (everyone else) are 'Total Annihilation' players who are intent on playing the game with it's full range of ships and weapons fully operational.

If you're in a ship that can avoid 100% of any weapon and escape combat at will (I fly a HG Snake nano Vaga/Sac/Ishtar/Zealot btw) and don't think it's broken, you need to get your brain checked.

Pheonix Kanan
Caldari
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:12:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Pheonix Kanan on 31/07/2008 12:15:26
I agree with you entirely. Unfortunately, as I have stated to many fellow eve players, CCP has a past history of over-nerfing (Nos, Damps, Carriers, for example). And there current eve community of a vocal minority is not helping the situation. Average nano pilots do not own snakes, not even low grade ones. Yet CCP based at lot of the nerfs on a vagabond with a HG snake set.

(Before I get into a rant)

It's kind of sad to CCP do something so detrimental, but alas. As PVP'ers, it's kind of our choosen lifestyle to have to always change tactics when a carebear loses his Rail-Raven to a smarter player

Wil Smithx
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:14:00 - [5]
 

ARGH WORDS!!!

Pheonix Kanan
Caldari
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:15:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Pheonix Kanan on 31/07/2008 12:17:46
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
You have it the wrong way around. Nano noobs are 'Starcraft', 'traditional' players (everyone else) are 'Total Annihilation' players who are intent on playing the game with it's full range of ships and weapons fully operational.

If you're in a ship that can avoid 100% of any weapon and escape combat at will (I fly a HG Snake nano Vaga/Sac/Ishtar/Zealot btw) and don't think it's broken, you need to get your brain checked.


Your HG snake set is a small percentage of nano pilots. And I have seen plenty of Vagas, Sacs, Ishtars, and Zealots (even with HG snakes) killed like any other ship. They are not invincible. It just takes, like every engagement should take, a plan.

Edit: I have seen plenty of other ships flying around eve that are not nano ships. I've even seen nano ships not being flown as nano ships. It's a choice. People just tend to gravitate towards what others are doing, which is why you see so many nano ships. So you can fly the full range of ships, you just choose not to.

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:20:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Pheonix Kanan
Edited by: Pheonix Kanan on 31/07/2008 12:17:46
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
You have it the wrong way around. Nano noobs are 'Starcraft', 'traditional' players (everyone else) are 'Total Annihilation' players who are intent on playing the game with it's full range of ships and weapons fully operational.

If you're in a ship that can avoid 100% of any weapon and escape combat at will (I fly a HG Snake nano Vaga/Sac/Ishtar/Zealot btw) and don't think it's broken, you need to get your brain checked.


Your HG snake set is a small percentage of nano pilots. And I have seen plenty of Vagas, Sacs, Ishtars, and Zealots (even with HG snakes) killed like any other ship. They are not invincible. It just takes, like every engagement should take, a plan.

Edit: I have seen plenty of other ships flying around eve that are not nano ships. I've even seen nano ships not being flown as nano ships. It's a choice. People just tend to gravitate towards what others are doing, which is why you see so many nano ships. So you can fly the full range of ships, you just choose not to.


I'm on the same set of HG Snakes for over two years now. What is that telling you?

Bloody Love
Republic Military School
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:33:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Pheonix Kanan
Edited by: Pheonix Kanan on 31/07/2008 12:17:46
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
You have it the wrong way around. Nano noobs are 'Starcraft', 'traditional' players (everyone else) are 'Total Annihilation' players who are intent on playing the game with it's full range of ships and weapons fully operational.

If you're in a ship that can avoid 100% of any weapon and escape combat at will (I fly a HG Snake nano Vaga/Sac/Ishtar/Zealot btw) and don't think it's broken, you need to get your brain checked.


Your HG snake set is a small percentage of nano pilots. And I have seen plenty of Vagas, Sacs, Ishtars, and Zealots (even with HG snakes) killed like any other ship. They are not invincible. It just takes, like every engagement should take, a plan.

Edit: I have seen plenty of other ships flying around eve that are not nano ships. I've even seen nano ships not being flown as nano ships. It's a choice. People just tend to gravitate towards what others are doing, which is why you see so many nano ships. So you can fly the full range of ships, you just choose not to.


I'm on the same set of HG Snakes for over two years now. What is that telling you?


You haven't flown your nano in over two years now? Twisted Evil

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:36:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Bloody Love
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Pheonix Kanan
Edited by: Pheonix Kanan on 31/07/2008 12:17:46
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
You have it the wrong way around. Nano noobs are 'Starcraft', 'traditional' players (everyone else) are 'Total Annihilation' players who are intent on playing the game with it's full range of ships and weapons fully operational.

If you're in a ship that can avoid 100% of any weapon and escape combat at will (I fly a HG Snake nano Vaga/Sac/Ishtar/Zealot btw) and don't think it's broken, you need to get your brain checked.


Your HG snake set is a small percentage of nano pilots. And I have seen plenty of Vagas, Sacs, Ishtars, and Zealots (even with HG snakes) killed like any other ship. They are not invincible. It just takes, like every engagement should take, a plan.

Edit: I have seen plenty of other ships flying around eve that are not nano ships. I've even seen nano ships not being flown as nano ships. It's a choice. People just tend to gravitate towards what others are doing, which is why you see so many nano ships. So you can fly the full range of ships, you just choose not to.


I'm on the same set of HG Snakes for over two years now. What is that telling you?


You haven't flown your nano in over two years now? Twisted Evil


Or maybe 14k/sec is broken? Hell, even 5.5k/sec is broken. And this is coming from someone who flies nano ships. Not because I like it, but because I have to since that's all there is.

Gartel Reiman
The Athiest Syndicate
Advocated Destruction
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:42:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Baudolino
I do however believe that you are in your changes also contemplating a sad mistake based on dangerous misconceptions.

I am of course talking about "nano".
(I have previously written about nano tactics which can be viewed following this Link)
I will in the following, where necessary use terms presented in that post.

"Nano" constitutes a space that is ill-defined and poorly understood. As a consequence any intervention can never be based on anything but lack of understanding, which in it`s furthest consequence can be detrimental.

Actually, from my point of view it's mainly us (i.e. the players, or at least the forum-going ones) that brought up the concept of nano. If you read the Dev blog again, notice that it all appears to be based around their five goals for speed (not nano). To my mind, of those five points, only the first and last specifically deal with nanoships.

In fact there've been quite a lot of wails around this from e.g. blaster BS pilots, along the lines of "this was meant to be a nano nerf! How come you're nerfing other ships too?" Whereas, if you refer back to the original blog, it doesn't state that this is a nano nerf - it states that this is an attempt to rebalance speed as a whole, to make it more manageable and more relevant. In fact, while the first goal was probably stated thinking about nanoHACs supplanting interceptors, I think it's just as valid when considering battleships hitting frigates/destroyers/cruisers in web range. Ideally the battleship should require some medium-/small-sized support to take out frigates, but currently it's able to.

Having said that, my favourite parts of the changes are the ones that don't affect nano-ships explicitly - the lowering of web strengths (hooray!) and to a lesser extent but probably quite important for balance, scrams deactivating MWDs. This really does make both afterburners, and small ships, viable again outside of very niche roles - judging by feeback from people who have been able to test webbed-AB speedtanking on SiSi. Also, the general resorting of speeds so that there's a relevant distinction between different classes is just a good thing and I don't think anyone can argue with the concept (though I'm sure some will manage to argue about the implemtation. Wink) As for the actual lowering of speeds in general, most notably/drastically with nanoships - it probably makes sense as these speeds are by CCP's admission not what game mechanics were based around (e.g. explosion velocities, drone speeds and to a lesser extent all concepts of range are out of whack with the intentions of how they work). So now nano-style fits should still be possible, but won't be able to greatly or completely negate damage from drones and missiles; rather will have to either fit a semi-nano semi-actual tank, using their speed and extra mobility to get in, do some damage, and disengage when things get too hot/target pops. Guerilla should still work, but invincible shouldn't, if the changes are carried out in a balanced fashion.


Anyway - my conclusion is that this isn't really a nano nerf, it's a speed rebalancing, and to my mind there's a major distinction there that's more than just semantics.

Zarnak Wulf
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:53:00 - [11]
 

The reduction of power for the web is huge. You can still speed tank- with an AB and under the guns of a larger ship- you just have to put it on the line now. Webs no longer are instadeath and that has enormous ramifications for tactics. Ships that weren't being used should now be popular. I guarantee you that if you're in a cruiser and you see an AF warp in- a shiver of fear will go down your spine. Risk and reward are restored.

Darahk J'olonar
Gallente
Trans Eve Organization
Posted - 2008.07.31 12:53:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Pheonix Kanan
Edited by: Pheonix Kanan on 31/07/2008 12:17:46
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
You have it the wrong way around. Nano noobs are 'Starcraft', 'traditional' players (everyone else) are 'Total Annihilation' players who are intent on playing the game with it's full range of ships and weapons fully operational.

If you're in a ship that can avoid 100% of any weapon and escape combat at will (I fly a HG Snake nano Vaga/Sac/Ishtar/Zealot btw) and don't think it's broken, you need to get your brain checked.


Your HG snake set is a small percentage of nano pilots. And I have seen plenty of Vagas, Sacs, Ishtars, and Zealots (even with HG snakes) killed like any other ship. They are not invincible. It just takes, like every engagement should take, a plan.

Edit: I have seen plenty of other ships flying around eve that are not nano ships. I've even seen nano ships not being flown as nano ships. It's a choice. People just tend to gravitate towards what others are doing, which is why you see so many nano ships. So you can fly the full range of ships, you just choose not to.


Phoenix it's not that they chose not too it's that they have no choice to remain competitive in PVP when all they face is nano ships. It has become so common to see gangs with nothing but nano Recons/HACs one would think that the rest of the ships out there don't exist. In order to bring the game back into the realms of reality the devs are doing what they feel is necessary to curb this nano trend.


Siddy
Minmatar
Evolution
IT Alliance
Posted - 2008.07.31 13:01:00 - [13]
 

poasting in srios thread full of serios missconcepts

Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2008.07.31 13:11:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Siddy
poasting in srios thread full of serios missconcepts


/thread. LaughingLaughingLaughing

Gimpb
The Scope
Posted - 2008.07.31 13:12:00 - [15]
 

I liked that nano had evolved as a fun playstyle but something needed to be done; vagas were replacing interceptors, ships being lost less was causing ship class inflation, and the backlash of large numbers of people training minmatar recons wasn't slowing down nano proliferation.

So it makes sense that they would feel they had to step in if the in game counters couldn't keep it under control enough to maintain a variety of play-styles.

Some of the changes are great--especially the weakening of webs, AFs getting frigate speed stats, and frigates in general becoming faster than cruisers in general. Those things should provide a good boost to frig play--which was needed, imo. I think causing nanofibers to stack nerf with ODs is also a good move to keep larger hulls from using their larger amount on lows to be faster ships they should be slower than.

Some of the other changes... seem to be very overdone. Especially the hit to ODs and the MWD warmup. ODs in and of themselves aren't all that powerful really, let them keep their strength--they can benefit AB fits and it's the high MWD speeds they're trying to bring down. That MWD warmup time is also going to make escaping gate gamps quite a bit harder.

I'm not with you on having cruisers able to outrun frigate missiles and drones, but avoiding damage is not really what made nanos powerful, imo, it's the ability to pick fights. It's a fit designed to pick off a few types of easy targets and run from everything they don't have enough muscle or numbers to take down.

We'll have to see how it all turns out, but I don't think the nano playstyle is dead at all. If they just remove that MWD warmup, the playstyle can go on using the ships that should be doing it--frigates. I personally look forward to playing with and against gangs of speed fit T2 frigs now that they'll hold their rightful place as the kings of the speed game.

Bloody Love
Republic Military School
Posted - 2008.07.31 13:18:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Or maybe 14k/sec is broken? Hell, even 5.5k/sec is broken. And this is coming from someone who flies nano ships. Not because I like it, but because I have to since that's all there is.


I'm glad for the speed rebalancing and the multitude of different "new" approaches to PvP that will have to arise from the nano ashes.

Speed will still be an alternative, but no guaranteed invulnerability anymore. You will still be able to go fast, but not insane fast.

iNsAn3
Caldari
Bad Wolf Syndicate
Posted - 2008.07.31 13:20:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Bloody Love
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Or maybe 14k/sec is broken? Hell, even 5.5k/sec is broken. And this is coming from someone who flies nano ships. Not because I like it, but because I have to since that's all there is.


I'm glad for the speed rebalancing and the multitude of different "new" approaches to PvP that will have to arise from the nano ashes.

Speed will still be an alternative, but no guaranteed invulnerability anymore. You will still be able to go fast, but not insane fast.


yesyesyesyesyesyes, im afraid this is the epic post here. 100% agree.

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.07.31 13:33:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Bellum Eternus


If you're in a ship that can avoid 100% of any weapon and escape combat at will (I fly a HG Snake nano Vaga/Sac/Ishtar/Zealot btw) and don't think it's broken, you need to get your brain checked.


This.

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.07.31 13:35:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 31/07/2008 13:36:35
Originally by: Pheonix Kanan
Edited by: Pheonix Kanan on 31/07/2008 12:17:46
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
You have it the wrong way around. Nano noobs are 'Starcraft', 'traditional' players (everyone else) are 'Total Annihilation' players who are intent on playing the game with it's full range of ships and weapons fully operational.

If you're in a ship that can avoid 100% of any weapon and escape combat at will (I fly a HG Snake nano Vaga/Sac/Ishtar/Zealot btw) and don't think it's broken, you need to get your brain checked.


Your HG snake set is a small percentage of nano pilots. And I have seen plenty of Vagas, Sacs, Ishtars, and Zealots (even with HG snakes) killed like any other ship. They are not invincible. It just takes, like every engagement should take, a plan.

Edit: I have seen plenty of other ships flying around eve that are not nano ships. I've even seen nano ships not being flown as nano ships. It's a choice. People just tend to gravitate towards what others are doing, which is why you see so many nano ships. So you can fly the full range of ships, you just choose not to.


Dont play dumb. You and I know that single snaked nano ship speeds arent the problem. Its not because of snakes they are nerfing it. Ebay warning if you dont grasp that. But meh, what can I expect from an alliance member that is in an alliance basically purely based on this type of combat.

kurg
Posted - 2008.07.31 14:07:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Baudolino
CCP

I`ve read the dev blog, i`ve thought about your proposals and i believe i understand the frame of mind in which these ideas were thought out.

I have played this game since the very beginning, i have seen all expansions and just about all the patches. I`ve played the game since there was no stacking and frigates fielded cruise missiles and battleships fitted 5x MWDs. I was there before "orbit" and indeed suggested it to CCP myself.

I believe that EVE today is caught in a limbo somewhere between tech II and tech III. Caught in a move in which "heat" and "combat boosters" are to be the next great thing in combat. As features central to tech III have been unleashed before the tech branch itself, we have a situation in wich non-stacking bonuses create the speeds you state to be insane- and a change is required or when tech III is introduced things will really get "insane".

I do however believe that you are in your changes also contemplating a sad mistake based on dangerous misconceptions.

I am of course talking about "nano".
(I have previously written about nano tactics which can be viewed following this Link)
I will in the following, where necessary use terms presented in that post.

"Nano" constitutes a space that is ill-defined and poorly understood. As a consequence any intervention can never be based on anything but lack of understanding, which in it`s furthest consequence can be detrimental.
There is no clear definition of what constitutes a "nano" ship- frequently people believe a ship is "nano" as long as it has some speed increasing modules on it and just as frequently turn to ships flying 15km/s to depict a ruinous fault in the game.

As i have previously stated, the game has 3 speeds: "max", "orbit" and "heated". The latter includes combat boosters and refers to temporary effects. In addition there are the gang bonuses which I`ll get back to.

The 15km/s ship relying on temporary effects will have a "max" speed somewhere around 9-10km/s and it`s "orbit" speed will be around 5-6km/s. The going mantra is that you need a ship flying 10km/s or faster to engage a 10km/s ship- nothing could be further from the truth- as i stated in the link above. This belief is thuroughly based on a lack of understanding of game mechanics and "nano" tactics.

I have previously defined "nano" as constituting ships flying at "max" speeds above 4.5km/s and this definition precludes 90% of the current so-called "nano" population. I use this speed because it is the speed required to effectively escape drones and missiles when entering "orbit" which speeds are significantly lower then "max", but "max" will and should always be the speed to which all others are compared. However it becomes dangerous when "max" speed is used to portray a reality in other situations in which it is not valid. It also becomes extremely dangerous when "heat/booster" speeds are referenced in a manner such as to cause confusion about what is "max" and what is a temporary effect.

I believe you are doing the same mistake you did when announcing a nerf to carriers, only this mistake is much greater. I see both mistakes as a possible indication of GMs and developers having less intimate knowledge of game mechanics then they had only 2 years ago. I see CCP relying in both cases on players with even less understanding of the mechanics they are discussing.

I believe EVE has evolved. I believe speed and the advanced gamestyle in it`s wake has been refreshing to eve and while some adaptations towards tech III are required and while extreme effects such as a Machariel doing 18km/s should be curtailed, the function and purpose of "nano" is valid and should not be removed.

-concluded in the next part-



I do not agree with OP and hope the changes proposed by CCP are implemented!

Miss Rumpelstilzchen
Minmatar
Black Horizon Ltd
Posted - 2008.07.31 14:32:00 - [21]
 

well so if this nano neaf comes ... you can also remove the Race Minmatar.
Vaga: speed HAC... after it its not able to get the speed to perform Hit&Run tactic (gurilia)
Stabber: same as vaga

Minmatar BS: they are a joke, Phoon only usefull in gang`s as RR and little dmg dealer

only good ship i see now are the Hurricane, but with lesser fitting options

so pleace CCP remove Minmatar and give all minmatar pilots a change to a Race of his favor, Thanks

Bloody Love
Republic Military School
Posted - 2008.07.31 14:35:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Miss Rumpelstilzchen
well so if this nano neaf comes ... you can also remove the Race Minmatar.
Vaga: speed HAC... after it its not able to get the speed to perform Hit&Run tactic (gurilia)
Stabber: same as vaga

Minmatar BS: they are a joke, Phoon only usefull in gang`s as RR and little dmg dealer

only good ship i see now are the Hurricane, but with lesser fitting options

so pleace CCP remove Minmatar and give all minmatar pilots a change to a Race of his favor, Thanks


B to the
U to the
L to the
L to the
S to the
H to the
I to the
T

Read the dev blog again and try to understand the balancing changes this time

Miss Rumpelstilzchen
Minmatar
Black Horizon Ltd
Posted - 2008.07.31 14:40:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Bloody Love


B to the
U to the
L to the
L to the
S to the
H to the
I to the
T

Read the dev blog again and try to understand the balancing changes this time


i read it .. and i think the Blog writer have no clue what hes writing, just a example:

Then there is also the size/price factor; why would I spend ISK on a sleek, fragile interceptor (thatís lithe and quick, supposedly), when I can just spend the money on a more durable heavy assault cruiser and reach even greater speeds?

whats wrong?

Yiv
Posted - 2008.07.31 15:01:00 - [24]
 

/agree Minmatar is now a redundant race. Minmatar relies on speed, nerf it and you have a race that has lower natural abilities and bonuses in all areas.

Welcome to the new era: 2x 50 man HAM drake gangs doing poor damage to each other with insane tanks.

Saietor Blackgreen
Armored Saints
Posted - 2008.07.31 15:03:00 - [25]
 

Nano becomes the only mechanic. It is "nano vs everything". This it should go away. It should not be more effective than EW, gank-fit, tank-fit or precision fit, or cap-warfare, or myriad of other means that can be used to gain advantage.

Currently, you need all of those to counter mobility-fitted ship. EVE system was not designed for that, and it became possible in the course of EvE sandbox expansion without sufficient control over exremes it may generate.

Now it finally gets fixed.

Unfortunately, the letter is returned to sender.

Bloody Love
Republic Military School
Posted - 2008.07.31 15:10:00 - [26]
 

Edited by: Bloody Love on 31/07/2008 15:21:09
Originally by: Miss Rumpelstilzchen
Originally by: Bloody Love


B to the
U to the
L to the
L to the
S to the
H to the
I to the
T

Read the dev blog again and try to understand the balancing changes this time


i read it .. and i think the Blog writer have no clue what hes writing, just a example:

Then there is also the size/price factor; why would I spend ISK on a sleek, fragile interceptor (thatís lithe and quick, supposedly), when I can just spend the money on a more durable heavy assault cruiser and reach even greater speeds?

whats wrong?


So a ship with a mass of 11,250,000kg (= Ishtar) should go as fast as (if not faster than) a ship with a mass of 1,100,000kg (= Ares) which is especially designed for being fast? And you don't think that's wrong?

Wasn't there a remark about "having brain surgery if you think so" already?

Euriti
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.07.31 15:15:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Euriti on 31/07/2008 15:16:28
Originally by: Siddy
poasting in srios thread full of serios missconcepts


This.

I fly in 0.0 and low sec, all the time and the common misconception that "Nanos is all there is" and "Soon everyone will be nano" can't be further from the truth. Nanos have a niche, a niche that is created by several changes made by CCP through the years, these include supercaps, jumpbridges, cynojammers etc. Nanos emerged because of above changes. It became hard to roam with small gangs in enemy territory because the defenders could set up bubblecamps and kill you with superior forces and could move about freely in their territory via jump bridges and jump portals from titans. Another factor to note is the vastness of 0.0. Hundreds of jumps to get from one place on the map to another. Then came nano fits, these could pass systems faster, avoid gatecamps and fight outnumbered. This tactic was taken on by small gangs as a way to fight the blob and roam freely. Without them I'm afraid we'll see less roaming gangs than we do now. This leads me to the next point. Nanos have this little niche as described above. This is where they work. They dont work for capfights, they dont work for big blobs, they dont work for taking down pos etc. etc.

They are not everywhere, they're not the only ships flown, not even the so called "nano*** alliances" fly nanos all the time. They fly battleships for pos ops, rr gangs, sniper fights and use capital ships for capital ops.

If it was nano vs everything then all there would be on killboards were nano ships.

This is not the truth, stop lying to support your argument. Thank you in advance

P'uck
Posted - 2008.07.31 15:23:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: P''uck on 31/07/2008 15:22:57
Originally by: Miss Rumpelstilzchen
whats wrong?

I guess you mean what's wrong is the cost relation, because you cannot just spend the same amount of isk on a HAC for the same result. You need to fork out all the way for primo performance on the HAC.

Problem probably is, once you invested in the equipment to get your HAC that fast, the shipcost ITSELF becomes negligible. 100mil for that ship? who cares, you just blew BILLIONS on your implants and rigs. and if you save that miniscule fraction of 90 mil to get that interceptor instead, yes, you will be that much faster, but pretty much useless compared to the hac guy.

nozh has a point. Im just afraid of what he wants to do to our 2pts.

Bloody Love
Republic Military School
Posted - 2008.07.31 15:26:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Euriti
Edited by: Euriti on 31/07/2008 15:16:28
Originally by: Siddy
poasting in srios thread full of serios missconcepts


This.

I fly in 0.0 and low sec, all the time and the common misconception that "Nanos is all there is" and "Soon everyone will be nano" can't be further from the truth. Nanos have a niche, a niche that is created by several changes made by CCP through the years, these include supercaps, jumpbridges, cynojammers etc. Nanos emerged because of above changes. It became hard to roam with small gangs in enemy territory because the defenders could set up bubblecamps and kill you with superior forces and could move about freely in their territory via jump bridges and jump portals from titans. Another factor to note is the vastness of 0.0. Hundreds of jumps to get from one place on the map to another. Then came nano fits, these could pass systems faster, avoid gatecamps and fight outnumbered. This tactic was taken on by small gangs as a way to fight the blob and roam freely. Without them I'm afraid we'll see less roaming gangs than we do now. This leads me to the next point. Nanos have this little niche as described above. This is where they work. They dont work for capfights, they dont work for big blobs, they dont work for taking down pos etc. etc.

They are not everywhere, they're not the only ships flown, not even the so called "nano*** alliances" fly nanos all the time. They fly battleships for pos ops, rr gangs, sniper fights and use capital ships for capital ops.

If it was nano vs everything then all there would be on killboards were nano ships.

This is not the truth, stop lying to support your argument. Thank you in advance


You just don't get it.

The upcoming changes won't be the end for fast roaming gangs. They just won't be invulnerable any more, people will be able to catch you and kill you if you invade their homeland.

And you might actually have to think about how you fit your ship instead of just following the masses like the good lemming that you are.

Euriti
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.07.31 15:41:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Bloody Love
Originally by: Euriti
Edited by: Euriti on 31/07/2008 15:16:28
Originally by: Siddy
poasting in srios thread full of serios missconcepts


This.

I fly in 0.0 and low sec, all the time and the common misconception that "Nanos is all there is" and "Soon everyone will be nano" can't be further from the truth. Nanos have a niche, a niche that is created by several changes made by CCP through the years, these include supercaps, jumpbridges, cynojammers etc. Nanos emerged because of above changes. It became hard to roam with small gangs in enemy territory because the defenders could set up bubblecamps and kill you with superior forces and could move about freely in their territory via jump bridges and jump portals from titans. Another factor to note is the vastness of 0.0. Hundreds of jumps to get from one place on the map to another. Then came nano fits, these could pass systems faster, avoid gatecamps and fight outnumbered. This tactic was taken on by small gangs as a way to fight the blob and roam freely. Without them I'm afraid we'll see less roaming gangs than we do now. This leads me to the next point. Nanos have this little niche as described above. This is where they work. They dont work for capfights, they dont work for big blobs, they dont work for taking down pos etc. etc.

They are not everywhere, they're not the only ships flown, not even the so called "nano*** alliances" fly nanos all the time. They fly battleships for pos ops, rr gangs, sniper fights and use capital ships for capital ops.

If it was nano vs everything then all there would be on killboards were nano ships.

This is not the truth, stop lying to support your argument. Thank you in advance


You just don't get it.

The upcoming changes won't be the end for fast roaming gangs. They just won't be invulnerable any more, people will be able to catch you and kill you if you invade their homeland.

And you might actually have to think about how you fit your ship instead of just following the masses like the good lemming that you are.


I don't fly nano ships so stop assuming. Second of all if we can't "invade your homeland" where are we supposed to fight then? Following your logic we can't fight where I live and can't fight where you live. So lets all be ratting friends?

With sisi speeds, HACs can't outrun gatecamps efficiently and to be able to just do it somewhat efficiently you have to give up dps and tank, and with sisi speeds, you can't speed tank, so you are very exposed to gatecamps, you've used your slots on some speed even though you can't speedtank and you're very fragile.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5

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