Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
KilROCK
Minmatar Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.08.03 08:25:00 -
[181]
EVE is going Ganka-Mode again, Tier 3 going to dish out damage, ECM nerfed, NOS getting nerfed, why not just go around with ganka fitting all the time again then.
Hell, This will be fun. Every ships that don't have the ability to push out damage enough will just get creamed, HAC prices will rise up unless this patch hits Kali or however the whole T2 bpo crap turns out.
EVE is going back and forth, everytime.. Only there's a couple of new toys every 6 months to play with and train for to see them worthless after that timeframe.
I love it. Exageration? Let's see when Kali hits then.
I can see alot of Amarr whiner when everyone starts using Tracking disruptors on their ships instead of a Multispec and everyone starts moaning about it..
Stabs,ECM,Nos. EVE is turning into a balanced game? HA ha, right... that's never going to happen. Back and Forward.
|
Wat0721
GalacTECH Unlimited
|
Posted - 2006.08.03 08:43:00 -
[182]
Originally by: Kalianyia
NOS? There are counters.
Orly? Let's evaluate them, then...
Quote: 1)Get out of range
How do frigates manage to tackle from 25km again?
Quote: 2) ECM them
You have a problem with frigates acting in their most useful role against larger ships and holding them down as support with little-to-no firepower, but not with a "300k" ship completely disabling a ship worth many, many times more with 1 mod?
Quote: 3) NOS back
Small NOS: - 8 cap every 3 seconds at 5km. Heavy NOS: 100 cap every 12 seconds at 21km. Do the math. Not only is the Heavy NOS going to completely deplete the frigate's cap, it's going to do it before the frigate gets into range to do what it's supposed to do.
Quote: 4) Cap injectors
In the sizes that frigates can keep loaded -- not a chance.
Originally by: Kalianyia
OMGZ!!!!!! SHOCK!!!! About BS's being able to NOS frigs? That is pretty much their own frig defence (unless they have a decent drone bay with decent skills). NOS is pretty much any BS's anti-frig weaponry. ...
It also acts as a wonderful defense against any other ship of the same class that needs cap to shoot, or as a wonderful offense if they need cap to tank! OR BOTH...simultaneously!
Also, if you'll look, every battleship has a drone bay. Know what you can fit into those drone bays?
Anti-frig drones. If you only pack guns and missiles and drones to fight big ships, expect trouble trying to swat the flies. Just because BSes are worth more doesn't mean that they should be unpinnable by anything other than BSes+.
Originally by: Kalianyia
SB's are limited in range.
...next.
Originally by: Kalianyia
It takes wayyy too many assualt launchers OR small weapons to kill a frig in any reasonable ammount of time. Plus a BS wasting 3-5 hi slots on assualt launchers /small turrets is totally unreasonable.
BS torps / cruise missiles / guns either wont hit or will do crap for damage and thus are not effective anti-frig tools.
Webbers are limited by range, and worthless against any decent frig pilot. They come in at 1,000-2,000 mps. Any idea how long it takes the web to slow them down? Too long to make it viable. Any decent frig pilot is not scared of a web.
OK, your credibility is out the window by now.
You almost had me for a minute, I thought this post was serious.
Originally by: Kalianyia
That pretty much takes care of that. ECM is about the only possible counter - but i doubt too many of you would like to see ECM become any more popular simply because NOS got gimped of its ability to handle frigs and now people are resorting to ECM as an anti-frig tool. Sadly ECM doesnt even help the BS kill the frig any easier. It just simply will let the BS warp if it needs to. So if your BS is jumped by 2-3+ frigs - oh your screwed! NOS will at least give the BS a fighting chance.
Oh noes! THE BEES!
/emote introduces aforementioned bees to Warrior IIs. /emote is not longer worried about aforementioned, above-referenced bees.
As Maya might say...
It looks like you're just trying to weaken support further. ---
ECM Fix |
Kldraina
|
Posted - 2006.08.03 08:46:00 -
[183]
It's balance through chaos, which I think is a lot more fun than having everything always be the same. It is as much a gamble to try predicting what ships and setups will be best in the future, as it is predicting what will be best for your next encounter.
Without change, things stagnate, and I always find that boring. |
Hillesumos
Minmatar Egg Enterprise
|
Posted - 2006.08.03 10:06:00 -
[184]
Edited by: Hillesumos on 03/08/2006 10:07:18 Dear all,
I would like to add my carebear imput to the discussion. Althought the proposed change to the wcs does look neat, it does have a few draw back for my own personal use.
First of all, i have an essential question to ask. I use quite a lot the transport class prowler which have a nifty -2 warp scramble bonus, does the proposed change would affect only the wcs module or would also affect any ships with lower scramble bonus.
Continuing on my extensive use of this ship, i mainly use this ship to pickup cans by using the tractor beam. I do tend to show up in belts where the corp mate ratting is not there and quite often i have a BC or BS spawn shooting at me. I do tank a bit but can't do it for ever so i normally quickly lock and pickup the loot. For safety purpose, i tend to put wcs o the low slot just to be on the safe side and if it take more time to lock and pick up the loot i may have issue to collect the loot quickly before my tank ran out.
Also, i know some miners that put wcs on the low slot and do ninja mining, again taking a bit more time to lock the roid is precious time not used to mine roids.
Further more, it would be nice if wcs gives bonus to non combat ships like hauler and transports such as increased agility.
cheers and may the minmatar god's of commerce save the wcs ---------
Sadly I just make ISK, I don't print it. :(
|
KilROCK
Minmatar Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.08.03 10:09:00 -
[185]
Originally by: Hillesumos D First of all, i have an essential question to ask. I use quite a lot the transport class prowler which have a nifty -2 warp scramble bonus, does the proposed change would affect only the wcs module or would also affect any ships with lower scramble bonus.
I don't see why it should affect blockade runners, I think you're 99.9% safe of any changes made to them. Anyone want to complain about these?
Something along the lines of "As i jumped in a systme, i've noticed a prowler class industrial ship in my Taranis, i was rigged out to kill, scrambler and a web! Suddenly, he uncloaks! I swiftly make my way to him and web him and put my scrambler on this lovely ship, and he warps!!41$!2!#!@315!?1, My taranis is t2, it's an interceptor, why couldn't i intercept NOOO".
|
Awox
Awox Inc.
|
Posted - 2006.08.03 12:45:00 -
[186]
Then you've still got the whole deal with people who go into fights with stabbed up battleships with dedicated tacklers. How do you counter that?
I guess CCP should negate scrambler strength based on gang WCS :) - nerf 0.5+ |
eLLioTT wave
Art of War
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 09:44:00 -
[187]
Originally by: Tuxford
... WCS This has been talked about for as long as I can remember. I'm not sure there has been any official stand on this from CCP although as I recall TomB has mentioned that he didn't like them. The problem is that when you go into a fight you should commit to it. The changes we've been looking at is pretty simple really. Just give penalty to targetting range and scan resolution. It only gimps people going into combat but wouldn't affect people travelling that much. ...
How is this going to affect stagabonds and make them "commit to fights"?
A simple one-move fix would be if a stab or multiple stabs are fitted, the targetting computer is disabled and you may not lock on to anything.
Doesnt affect industrial ships and if you are traveling in a ship you have setup to travel, you're not going to be fighting (this makes sure of it).
|
KilROCK
Minmatar Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 09:47:00 -
[188]
Edited by: KilROCK on 18/08/2006 09:48:12
Originally by: eLLioTT wave
Originally by: Tuxford
... WCS This has been talked about for as long as I can remember. I'm not sure there has been any official stand on this from CCP although as I recall TomB has mentioned that he didn't like them. The problem is that when you go into a fight you should commit to it. The changes we've been looking at is pretty simple really. Just give penalty to targetting range and scan resolution. It only gimps people going into combat but wouldn't affect people travelling that much. ...
How is this going to affect stagabonds and make them "commit to fights"?
A simple one-move fix would be if a stab or multiple stabs are fitted, the targetting computer is disabled and you may not lock on to anything.
Doesnt affect industrial ships and if you are traveling in a ship you have setup to travel, you're not going to be fighting (this makes sure of it).
It won't change vagabonds to lose stabs that much.
With upcoming patches, you'll get NOS nerfed, ECM nerfed. Vagabond pilots might not be affected that greatly by this, it will still be impossible to knock them down and if you don't want to engage something in your vagabond, you only cruise away at 6km/s.
So, you can't NOS it enough to stop it from tapping the mwd, you can't jam it effectivly with any of your 1 multispec fitted ships.
People need to grow some brain and realise the ship is about thinking before engaging, and with tactics, it's how the vagabond becomes the best solo ship.
|
madaluap
Gallente Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 11:09:00 -
[189]
Edited by: madaluap on 18/08/2006 11:16:19
Originally by: Nidhoggur
Originally by: Dinique If I fit 2 points of scrambling, and 3 points of stabilizing on MY ship, I only effectively should have 1 point of stabilization. Hence my own scramblers cancel out my own stabilizers, and unlike how it works now, where you need 4 points to beat my 3 WCS, you'd only need 2 points in that case, since I'd effectively only have 1 WCS.
I like this idea.
Me aswell, this is a really good idea.
Based on dont do to others, what you dont want to happen to yourself = Getting warpscrambled.
@Keorythe
I have seen plenty of interdictors in 0.0 and i must say, they kinda rock and are a very powerfull tool with extreme warpscrambling capability, good damage output and highspeed. _________________________________________________
|
Keorythe
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 11:09:00 -
[190]
Why mess with WCS? They're already balanced as is for small unit actions and piracy.
If you want to address the "stay and fight" issue then why not RETHINK INTERDICTORS?
Seriously, interdictors and not popular to use. They have poor resists, poor grid/cpu, poor bonuses, have a survival duration measuring in seconds, need I go on? For the skills needed to use one why not make it more viable in the field thus making it more popular to use?
-Adjust resists up to Assualt Frigate levels (the skill requirements already justify them)
-Redo warp bubble items to make them more user friendly (fittings, launching, etc)
-Increase grid/cpu to facilitate fittings.
-Come up with new scramble units like an interdictor based burst or a bonus to scrambler strength for interdictors only.
If people are complaining about too many others not wanting to stay and fight make it so that more battlefields are locked down and that NO ONE can leave till the fight is over.
Rethinking the interdictor is long overdue. Doing so now would address the scramble/stabilizer issue and fix an old ship that is very unpopular in combat. PvP, piracy, and even missions would benefit from something like this. How hard would it be for you to readjust and keep it balanced?
|
|
Magnus Thermopyle
Chosen Path
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 11:51:00 -
[191]
Edited by: Magnus Thermopyle on 18/08/2006 11:52:34 Tuxford, have you considered making NOSes drain a % of the maximum cap instead of a fixed amount. For example, big NOSes could drain 5%, medium ones 3% and small ones 1%.
This has a number of nice effects, like small NOSes will be far more useful against big ships, and big NOSes will not be an "I Win" button against smaller ships.
A NOS domi would still drain all ships, but it will take the same of time (3 cycles) to drain a big ship as it takes to drain a small ship.
This way of doing it seems more natural an more inline with the rest of the game mechanisms, which always revolves around %.
|
Soyemia
Minmatar Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 12:03:00 -
[192]
WCS are fine. They give you more tha 10% damage reducion, as you can fit dmg mod in their place, or cap mod. I hate those "honor" guys. Go play knight games.
Proud member of fix. Hated on finnish channel.
Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty - Cortes |
Slevin Kalebra
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 12:21:00 -
[193]
Originally by: Magnus Thermopyle Tuxford, have you considered making NOSes drain a % of the maximum cap instead of a fixed amount. For example, big NOSes could drain 5%, medium ones 3% and small ones 1%.
Or what about draining a percentage of the remaining cap (up to a fixed maximum per cycle)? That gives you diminishing returns as the target's cap starts to dry up. If you wanted to make the amount slightly variable, factor in the target ship sig radius in calculating the maximum drain per cycle.
|
Kaylana Syi
Minmatar The Nest
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 12:27:00 -
[194]
Originally by: Soyemia WCS are fine. They give you more tha 10% damage reducion, as you can fit dmg mod in their place, or cap mod. I hate those "honor" guys. Go play knight games.
I bet you fly a vagabond...
Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
|
MrRookie
Caldari Dark and Light inc. D-L
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 12:37:00 -
[195]
Originally by: Slevin Kalebra
Originally by: Magnus Thermopyle Tuxford, have you considered making NOSes drain a % of the maximum cap instead of a fixed amount. For example, big NOSes could drain 5%, medium ones 3% and small ones 1%.
Or what about draining a percentage of the remaining cap (up to a fixed maximum per cycle)? That gives you diminishing returns as the target's cap starts to dry up. If you wanted to make the amount slightly variable, factor in the target ship sig radius in calculating the maximum drain per cycle.
I thought about this aswell. It's a really good idea. You will have dimishing returns but still be drying up the cap even if it's litle. It will be more benefitical draining large ships rather than frigs. The only downside is how Nos will affect capital ships though, so it has to be a maximum drain or something like it. ________________________________________________
________________________________________________ |
Alupigus1
Delta team Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 13:25:00 -
[196]
Originally by: Dinique I still say the best solution is to have your scramblers and stabalizers cancel eachother out.
If you fit 3 points of stabilizers, and 2 points of scrambling you should effectively only have 1 point of stabilizing.
Sounds fair.. plus looks easy to implement.
Another thing: why don't make 20km scrams have a 1.1 strength? Even 1.01 works, 1.01 for 20km ones and 2.01 for 7.5km ones. Or add a skill allowing you to increase scrambler modules strength, something like par with wcs at level 4 and better at level 5. |
Caoim Fearghul
Caldari Surani Holdings
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 13:28:00 -
[197]
I'm not going to comment on NOS, but with regards to WCS the general thought seems to be that people shouldnt be able to escape from your attack.
Why the bloody hell have WCS at all then?
Simply by fitting them you're loosing slots that can give you other bonuses in a fight. The idea here on the "nerf WCS" side seems to be that people have no business withdrawing from combat. That's frankly retarded, the inital choice of whether to engage or not and the form of the engagement lies with the agressor. Dropping some low slots to make sure that you have the option to flee if someone jumping you has the advantage (something really bloody likely if they have actually chosen to engage you) is just adding options other than "sit and get ganked" which seems to be what the nerf WCS bunch want.
Boo-hoo, woe is me! I tried to jump someone and kill them and they ran away! It's sooo unfair! Prodesse Non Nocere
|
Yarek Balear
Veto.
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 13:32:00 -
[198]
Edited by: Yarek Balear on 18/08/2006 13:34:03
Originally by: Tuxford
WCS This has been talked about for as long as I can remember. I'm not sure there has been any official stand on this from CCP although as I recall TomB has mentioned that he didn't like them. The problem is that when you go into a fight you should commit to it. The changes we've been looking at is pretty simple really. Just give penalty to targetting range and scan resolution. It only gimps people going into combat but wouldn't affect people travelling that much.
All over EVE there are limits imposed on ships that engage in combat, such as not disappearing from local for 30 minutes, not able to jump/dock following aggression. Why not simply extend that principle to WCS - i.e. WCS do not activate until 30 seconds/one minute after aggression. This allows travelling ships that do not respond to attack to maintain WCS, but stops people fighting then deciding to warp off when it looks bad.
EDIT: just to clarify - this allows travelling ships or ships that are jumped without warning the ability to escape if they don't like the odds, but not ships that attack/respond then decided it's looking bad and run away (e.g. stababond).
|
Alupigus1
Delta team Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 13:40:00 -
[199]
Edited by: Alupigus1 on 18/08/2006 13:40:47
Originally by: Yarek Balear Edited by: Yarek Balear on 18/08/2006 13:34:03
Originally by: Tuxford
WCS This has been talked about for as long as I can remember. I'm not sure there has been any official stand on this from CCP although as I recall TomB has mentioned that he didn't like them. The problem is that when you go into a fight you should commit to it. The changes we've been looking at is pretty simple really. Just give penalty to targetting range and scan resolution. It only gimps people going into combat but wouldn't affect people travelling that much.
All over EVE there are limits imposed on ships that engage in combat, such as not disappearing from local for 30 minutes, not able to jump/dock following aggression. Why not simply extend that principle to WCS - i.e. WCS do not activate until 30 seconds/one minute after aggression. This allows travelling ships that do not respond to attack to maintain WCS, but stops people fighting then deciding to warp off when it looks bad.
EDIT: just to clarify - this allows travelling ships or ships that are jumped without warning the ability to escape if they don't like the odds, but not ships that attack/respond then decided it's looking bad and run away (e.g. stababond).
What about real tackling?
edit: i thought that will affect dictors, my bad.
|
Magnus Thermopyle
Chosen Path
|
Posted - 2006.08.18 21:26:00 -
[200]
Originally by: MrRookie
Originally by: Slevin Kalebra
Originally by: Magnus Thermopyle Tuxford, have you considered making NOSes drain a % of the maximum cap instead of a fixed amount. For example, big NOSes could drain 5%, medium ones 3% and small ones 1%.
Or what about draining a percentage of the remaining cap (up to a fixed maximum per cycle)? That gives you diminishing returns as the target's cap starts to dry up. If you wanted to make the amount slightly variable, factor in the target ship sig radius in calculating the maximum drain per cycle.
I thought about this aswell. It's a really good idea. You will have dimishing returns but still be drying up the cap even if it's litle. It will be more benefitical draining large ships rather than frigs. The only downside is how Nos will affect capital ships though, so it has to be a maximum drain or something like it.
Yea, % drain from remaining cap is even better, but it also means a bigger "nerf".
And yes, there should be a maximum amount of cap you recieve, but the drain should not be capped. For example, if a frig with a small 1% nos drains a 5000 cap BS, it will drain 50 cap, but only recieve a maximum of about 15.
And with nos working like this, you would not have to have special fixes to balance them.
|
|
VeNT
Minmatar Freelancer Union Unaffiliated
|
Posted - 2006.09.17 11:06:00 -
[201]
maybe if nos took a % of the remaining cap? ie it steals 10% of remaining cap upto a max of xxx and effected by range (ie works further away than now but to less effect and gets better the closer in you are)
-------------------- Selena 001 > has VeNT left system? its gone really quiet! |
Arknox
|
Posted - 2006.09.17 12:06:00 -
[202]
Fix to nosf ...
Instead of getting cap from it make it some sort of "light neutralizer"
Same cap drain but it doesn't add cap to your own .
Nosdomi's get less unbeatable tanks , it sacrefices a highslot and if you realy want to drain someone's cap fit neutralizers !
also give it a tracking, falloff and optimal as suggested so many times before. Frigs would orbit in 5km and wouldn't get affected , bs's and cruisers would ...
Bs's should not be able to kill frigs imo , we got so many anti-frig ships but why fly them when bs's can do it better ?
The purpose of bs's should be killing anti-frig support (cruisers/hacs) and other bs's
Decrease fitting for nosf so it wouldn't get replaced by neutralizers and neutralizers would still do what they should .
A other easy fix would be removing nosf *puts on flame-resistant suite* i like beans |
Trind2222
|
Posted - 2006.09.17 14:47:00 -
[203]
I like sarmuls ida to nos but i think it shoud have change to drain
Havy Nos 100% change to drain Batleship and larger 40 % to drain cruser's and same size ships 20% drain smal ships
Medium Nos 100% agens batle ships and lager 100% agenst cruser same size ships 40% smal ships
smal nos 100 % to all ship types.
So now I think balcing tearm and they say but batle ship shoud be pwn ship think before posting it shoud not be such a ship in game it shoud have it disavanges to.
|
Sphynx Stormlord
|
Posted - 2006.09.17 15:48:00 -
[204]
A possible nos nerf would be to have each nos cycle onle be able to steal a maximum % of the cap left in the ship being nossed, while still being limited by the current amounts stealable.
If the limit was, say 10%, then a normal battleship v battleship nos (which would normally steal around 30/cycle) would be unnafected by this limit untill the target had only 300 cap left, which is almost nothing from a battleships point of view. A cruiser, however, whose total cap is much lower, would be affected normally by the nos to start with, but when their cap gets below 300 (maybe 1/3 or a 1/4 of a cruisers cap) then the nos would start operating at reduced effectiveness.
Against a frigate, however, the nos would be operating at a reduced level right from the start (frigates mostly have less than 300 cap). Stealing only 10% per cycle would mean that the frigate would not be drained dry at the problematic high speed that would currently happen.
|
john2
Minmatar Drones of Annihilation
|
Posted - 2006.09.18 00:20:00 -
[205]
so what use would a curse be if you kill nos. it be one more unless ammar ship to the pile. wcs are you all forgot some that was in the game for a reason, bubbles can you warp out from them. no would it make a hell of a diffent if you had 8 wcs on. + losing my ship to a 50k frigate get real you could have tank or anything if you did not have wcs. y don t do what they did with jamming when you warp scram % not it work each time
|
MissileRus
|
Posted - 2006.09.18 02:14:00 -
[206]
Edited by: MissileRus on 18/09/2006 02:17:57 nos nerf sucks... clever frig pilots could already avoid 2 heavy nos while killing most normal bs setups. wish i started playing when battleships were more common in pvp and when people didnt always fly in gangs of 10+ now its all frigs and blobbs.. only way to have a good 1v1 bs fight will be/is fighting someone in the same corp. frigates are starting to pop up on my walls now
frigate > battleship
frigate > 0.0
frigate > carriers
frigate > pos
oh wait its frigate+vagabond > eve..
--------------------------- 4. i like pizza |
Sola Cargo
|
Posted - 2006.10.05 18:11:00 -
[207]
WCS
Maybe make their effects stackable with diminishing returns, like strength = sqrt(number of wcs):
1 wcs: -1 2 wcs: -1.4 3 wcs: -1.7 4 wcs: -2.0
Over 4 wcs anti-scramble strength should stay -2.0
NOS:
Multiply an amount of energy, drained by NOS, by current cap %% of the victim, so if victim is at 33% total cap, NOS will drain 33% of their maximum, while using 100% needed for activation (actually even draining attacker).
That will allow smaller ships to NOS energy back and stay at like 10-20% of full cap for current needs (no total "capacitor is empty" shutdowns). Will make NOS usage more intelligent, as well (will need to turn it off sometimes) and make some space for energy neutralizers, too.
|
Complacency's Bane
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.10.05 18:25:00 -
[208]
Edited by: Complacency''s Bane on 05/10/2006 18:25:25
Originally by: MissileRus Edited by: MissileRus on 18/09/2006 02:17:57 nos nerf sucks... clever frig pilots could already avoid 2 heavy nos while killing most normal bs setups. wish i started playing when battleships were more common in pvp and when people didnt always fly in gangs of 10+ now its all frigs and blobbs.. only way to have a good 1v1 bs fight will be/is fighting someone in the same corp. frigates are starting to pop up on my walls now
frigate > battleship
frigate > 0.0
frigate > carriers
frigate > pos
oh wait its frigate+vagabond > eve..
OMG is it ALTNAME II?
P.S. Mitchman is always right.
|
Tasty Burger
|
Posted - 2006.10.05 19:51:00 -
[209]
Originally by: SkottE NOS/NEUT are fine, why should a SMALLER ship be able to destroy a BIGGER ship. Try that in real-life see what happens.
As for WC's, I hope they get nerfed/fixed.
Also for ECM, FIX IT PLZ:..
stfu about real life, nub.
|
SkottE
SkottE Technologies
|
Posted - 2006.10.05 20:44:00 -
[210]
Originally by: Tasty Burger
Originally by: SkottE NOS/NEUT are fine, why should a SMALLER ship be able to destroy a BIGGER ship. Try that in real-life see what happens.
As for WC's, I hope they get nerfed/fixed.
Also for ECM, FIX IT PLZ:..
stfu about real life, nub.
As if you have more experience than me at RL do you...? (don't t you dare say anthying about RL combat...) _________________________________________ Want to build Tech2 equipment and ships? Take a look here to find out! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |