open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [ISSUE] CCP consider alternative speed changes - MWDs & Weapon Systems
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Author Topic

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2008.08.05 21:01:00 - [31]
 

Lol if ccp had proposed this everyone would have been against.

Also it would mean if you turn your mwd off in your blaster ship you need to wait till its cycle end before you can actually start firing.

Cosy
Posted - 2008.08.05 21:07:00 - [32]
 

if MWD will become run away/get in combat module should be abit more effective

Grath Telkin
Amarr
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.08.05 21:12:00 - [33]
 

YES

Its a good place to start, ONE SIMPLE CHANGE

Shirazz
Amarr
NibbleTek
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.08.05 21:12:00 - [34]
 

Edited by: Shirazz on 05/08/2008 21:18:29
yes yes yes yes yes *gasp* yes yes yes...

you get the msg, any BUT the current nano nerf

Wrathful Penguins
Quafe LP

Posted - 2008.08.05 21:14:00 - [35]
 

Better than the sisi stuff atm. :P

Agillious
Gallente
Aliastra

Posted - 2008.08.05 21:18:00 - [36]
 

I like the idea of making the MWD for maneuvering, and the AB for combat speed.

I was gonna write some stuff about the other changes I like WITH this proposal by Sarm... but. Yeah. Why pollute this thread.

GOGO Maneuver Drive!

Andreya
Red Federation
Posted - 2008.08.05 21:33:00 - [37]
 

make MWDs scripted.... so you can change between AB and MWD.. then maybe this would work (thinking of intys and frigates)

OR! just allow the max of one of each speed mod... wow.. problem solved

Zeroskills
Endgame.
Posted - 2008.08.05 21:38:00 - [38]
 

I really like this solution. This is an elegant fix for the speed problem, and will have *much* fewer unintended consequences than the current Sisi patch.


Dear CCP:

Feel free to mix and match this proposal with specific element of the Sisi patch
-- AF boost is great
-- Polycarbon nerf is appropriate
-- Snake set nerf is understandable
-- The new warp disruptor mechanics, in conjunction with the webifier nerf, are great
-- If specific ships (or modules) are out of balance, targeted stat changes are fine.

Just please don't change all combat mechanics and ship stats at once. Fixing unintended imbalances created by the current Sisi patch would keep your balance team busy for a year or more. Please give this alternative some thought.

RuriHoshino
Minmatar
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2008.08.05 21:39:00 - [39]
 

Edited by: RuriHoshino on 05/08/2008 21:39:52
Originally by: Furb Killer
Lol if ccp had proposed this everyone would have been against.

Also it would mean if you turn your mwd off in your blaster ship you need to wait till its cycle end before you can actually start firing.


You're exactly right, congratulations. It's a shame that blaster ships don't generally carry fat armor-plated HP buffers, because that would allow them to mistime their approach and still survive long enough to kill their tar... owait... Embarassed

Not to mention that at the absolute worst that's a 10 second wait before your still highest raw DPS weapons system in the game proceeds to chew through them. It would require a tiny bit of finesse, not quite so much as kiting at the bleeding edge of web range in an AC cruiser, but still.

More seriously, you might also be right that if CCP had proposed it the player base would have crapped on it as well. However, it still would have at least been a moderate, limited change to one or two modules, rather than a ham-handed sweeping overhaul of fundamental game mechanics.

Aleus Stygian
Posted - 2008.08.05 21:45:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: RuriHoshino
You're exactly right, congratulations. It's a shame that blaster ships don't generally carry fat armor-plated HP buffers, because that would allow them to mistime their approach and still survive long enough to kill their tar... owait... Embarassed

Not to mention that at the absolute worst that's a 10 second wait before your still highest raw DPS weapons system in the game proceeds to chew through them. It would require a tiny bit of finesse, not quite so much as kiting at the bleeding edge of web range in an AC cruiser, but still.

More seriously, you might also be right that if CCP had proposed it the player base would have crapped on it as well. However, it still would have at least been a moderate, limited change to one or two modules, rather than a ham-handed sweeping overhaul of fundamental game mechanics.


Spaketh, the truthiness has been.

Shamharoth
Gallente
Beach Boys
BeachBoys
Posted - 2008.08.05 22:02:00 - [41]
 

Sarmaul is a genius, c/d?

C YARRRR!!

Eternal Error
Exitus Acta Probant
Posted - 2008.08.05 22:22:00 - [42]
 

Edited by: Eternal Error on 05/08/2008 22:22:33
Against. Still don't really think speed is that much of a problem, there is no need for this when they could just do a smaller nerf of polycarbons, snakes, and gang boni.

Kecheor
REUNI0N Holding
RED Citizens
Posted - 2008.08.05 22:31:00 - [43]
 

Sounds damn hot.

Navigator Six
Domination.
Legion of The Damned.
Posted - 2008.08.05 22:37:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Eternal Error
Edited by: Eternal Error on 05/08/2008 22:22:33
Against. Still don't really think speed is that much of a problem, there is no need for this when they could just do a smaller nerf of polycarbons, snakes, and gang boni.

This is true, but it seems clear that CCP are not content with that, but want to address the current over-reliance on speed as well. Which is reasonable, as is this suggestion.

RuriHoshino
Minmatar
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2008.08.05 22:37:00 - [45]
 

Edited by: RuriHoshino on 05/08/2008 22:38:22
Originally by: Eternal Error
Edited by: Eternal Error on 05/08/2008 22:22:33
Against. Still don't really think speed is that much of a problem, there is no need for this when they could just do a smaller nerf of polycarbons, snakes, and gang boni.


This is the thread for bonii. Seriously, how many people actually think that's the proper plural?

So if speed isn't that much of a problem why should polys snakes and gang bonuses get nerfed? (I happen to agree with you on this point) It's pretty clear that CCP is going to cave to the whiners in some form, we might as well argue that there's a better way to do it. And unfortunately, smaller, reasonable adjustments seem to be out of favour in Iceland. This idea is new enough that it might get their attention, while being low-key enough to not, say, render several entire classes of ships and combat tactics useless.

Space Flyer
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.05 22:41:00 - [46]
 

It sucks, a vaga that doesn't shoot with the mwd on is even more useless than a slow vaga tbh.

Majickthise
Posted - 2008.08.05 22:58:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: Majickthise on 05/08/2008 23:16:18


Originally by: Space Flyer
It sucks, a vaga that doesn't shoot with the mwd on is even more useless than a slow vaga tbh.


oh wow. wait till your corp mate Dinique gets hold of you. Rolling Eyes

great idea though. much more subtle than CCPs mass nerfbat usage of reckless abandon.

RuriHoshino
Minmatar
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2008.08.05 23:03:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: Space Flyer
It sucks, a vaga that shoots with the mwd on is not going to hit the side of a barn because it's guns can't physically track a target that it's orbiting at MWD speeds.


Fixed your post. Here's a protip: if you're orbiting a target in a Vagabond and you actually want to hurt it, you need to moderate your speed so that you're not orbiting at a radial velocity that exceeds the tracking ability of your guns.

This change would make it impossible to run away and shoot a tackling interceptor off you at the same time, which would force you to make a tactical choice regarding the best way to extract yourself from your current situation. But that's something decent nano pilots are familiar with already, so it shouldn't be a problem.

Aleus Stygian
Posted - 2008.08.05 23:10:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: RuriHoshino
This change would make it impossible to run away and shoot a tackling interceptor off you at the same time, which would force you to make a tactical choice regarding the best way to extract yourself from your current situation. But that's something decent nano pilots are familiar with already, so it shouldn't be a problem.


You mean that they know anything but how to line themselves up for the best trajectory? So far, I haven't seen much else...

Apolluon
Gallente
No Limit Productions
Looney Toons.
Posted - 2008.08.05 23:20:00 - [50]
 

This deserves to be tested with a poly and a snake nerf, and nothing else, to see how it holds itself up.

It makes more sense than a lot of stuff that makes it onto Sisi.

CCP, if you have a shred of respect for players opinions regarding game mechanics, you will lend serious thought to this change as an alternative to the potential overhaul you intend. It's simple, it works, it provides utility for both modules. Did I mention it's simple?

And it wouldn't require the total database tweak you intend.

Apolluon

Space Flyer
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.05 23:26:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: RuriHoshino
Originally by: Space Flyer
It sucks, a vaga that shoots with the mwd on is not going to hit the side of a barn because it's guns can't physically track a target that it's orbiting at MWD speeds.


Fixed your post. Here's a protip: if you're orbiting a target in a Vagabond and you actually want to hurt it, you need to moderate your speed so that you're not orbiting at a radial velocity that exceeds the tracking ability of your guns.

This change would make it impossible to run away and shoot a tackling interceptor off you at the same time, which would force you to make a tactical choice regarding the best way to extract yourself from your current situation. But that's something decent nano pilots are familiar with already, so it shouldn't be a problem.


Your post proves that you've never flown a vaga or that you're just bad at it. If you get in a fight the job of a vaga is often to get rid of support ships and you have to do it with the mwd on... and believe me man, you can track with the mwd on when flying a vaga... if you do it right of course.

Same discussion can be made with ships like zealots or curses, you need to keep your speed up or missiles will just **** you.

Zarlis
Gallente
Posted - 2008.08.05 23:29:00 - [52]
 

looks good, especially the bit about buffing ABs. Also this way you don't need to screw with webs.

Isyel
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe

Posted - 2008.08.05 23:49:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Space Flyer
Your post proves that you've never flown a vaga or that you're just bad at it. If you get in a fight the job of a vaga is often to get rid of support ships and you have to do it with the mwd on... and believe me man, you can track with the mwd on when flying a vaga... if you do it right of course.

Same discussion can be made with ships like zealots or curses, you need to keep your speed up or missiles will just **** you.


Oh but making it a useless ship is -so- much better, amirite?

Fully support this thread.

Apolluon
Gallente
No Limit Productions
Looney Toons.
Posted - 2008.08.05 23:51:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: Space Flyer
Your post proves that you've never flown a vaga or that you're just bad at it. If you get in a fight the job of a vaga is often to get rid of support ships and you have to do it with the mwd on... and believe me man, you can track with the mwd on when flying a vaga... if you do it right of course.

Same discussion can be made with ships like zealots or curses, you need to keep your speed up or missiles will just **** you.


Hello, I am the tracking guide. I wish to inform you that after performing several calculations on a vagabond vs a 140m Signature target, using a 220mm ACII...

The best case scenario for being capable of orbiting said target outside of web range provided me with a whopping 11.64 Orbit, at 2000m/sec. Using Republic Fleet EMP, that nets me an overall average chance to hit of only 11%, with a single gun DPS output of approximately 1.72 (yes, One point Seven Two).

Of course, implants and overal skills were not taken into account with this, and may account for the capability of actually being able to perform up to twice (that's 2X) that damage, at twice (4000m/sec) those speeds.

So, to summarise...

FAIL

Apolluon

Elijah Maelstrom
Queens of the Stone Age
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2008.08.05 23:51:00 - [55]
 

I love this idea.

RuriHoshino
Minmatar
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2008.08.05 23:55:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Space Flyer
Your post proves that you've never flown a vaga or that you're just bad at it. If you get in a fight the job of a vaga is often to get rid of support ships and you have to do it with the mwd on... and believe me man, you can track with the mwd on when flying a vaga... if you do it right of course.

Same discussion can be made with ships like zealots or curses, you need to keep your speed up or missiles will just **** you.


Any interceptor that lets a Vagabond get zero transversal on it deserves to die, quite honestly. Your post didn't mention anything like clearing support, a job that HACs in general excel at. There are certainly circumstances where any ship might desire to continue shooting people with it's MWD on, not just the Vagabond. This change would entail an adjustment to current high-speed tactics, yes, but saying that the Vagabond in particular would be useless because of it is just silly.

If you really do have an in-depth, informed opinion, something I'm not prepared to rule out completely, then explain yourself more clearly next time so we can have a decent discussion. One sentence "this sux" replies don't earn you much respect in this thread.

Frug
Omega Wing
Snatch Victory
Posted - 2008.08.06 00:39:00 - [57]
 

Still fence sitting on this one am I.

Also, include the speed buff to AF's plz.


Space Flyer
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.08.06 00:49:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Apolluon
Originally by: Space Flyer
Your post proves that you've never flown a vaga or that you're just bad at it. If you get in a fight the job of a vaga is often to get rid of support ships and you have to do it with the mwd on... and believe me man, you can track with the mwd on when flying a vaga... if you do it right of course.

Same discussion can be made with ships like zealots or curses, you need to keep your speed up or missiles will just **** you.


Hello, I am the tracking guide. I wish to inform you that after performing several calculations on a vagabond vs a 140m Signature target, using a 220mm ACII...

The best case scenario for being capable of orbiting said target outside of web range provided me with a whopping 11.64 Orbit, at 2000m/sec. Using Republic Fleet EMP, that nets me an overall average chance to hit of only 11%, with a single gun DPS output of approximately 1.72 (yes, One point Seven Two).

Of course, implants and overal skills were not taken into account with this, and may account for the capability of actually being able to perform up to twice (that's 2X) that damage, at twice (4000m/sec) those speeds.

So, to summarise...

FAIL

Apolluon


Yes... in a perfect world maybe...

Hehulk
Black Sea Industries
Posted - 2008.08.06 01:20:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: Space Flyer
Yes... in a perfect world maybe...


Your ****posting. Either take it elsewhere or actually prove what you saying without resorting to vagueries.

Avanine
Posted - 2008.08.06 01:48:00 - [60]
 

Edited by: Avanine on 06/08/2008 01:48:28
As a staunch BlasterBS Pilot - I have to say I fully support Sarmaul's idea, retains the purpose of MWD's and at the same time takes some of the edge off the nanoness of select ships.

Not that I've ever been pwn'd by a nanovaga, no, not at all. I'm not bitter about it either...

*grins* seriously though, as has been said, way easier to implement, so come on CCP, let it loose on Sisi for a few days and get some practical feedback eh?

Avanine.
(Obvious Alt is Obvious?)


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

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