Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cogswin Iannyen
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 17:23:00 -
[31]
I think the best solution would be to increase the range of energy vamps and neuts. Rather than directly affecting the speed of the nanoship, allow players a chance at attacking the power core, to force the nano to either manage their capacitor differently, or face being caught. Right now the only thing that can catch a nano is a huggin or another nano, but increasing the energy vamp range would give all other ships some form of defense, without having fight inside of web range.
|
7shining7one7
Quafe Paladins
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 17:38:00 -
[32]
double posting
and no imo.
threads like these are based on misconceptions.
|
Ecky X
Your Assets Relocated
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 17:48:00 -
[33]
How about making webs a function of signature radius? IE, a web might slow 50%, and when someone turns on their MWD, it gives them 6x the sig radius, and the web becomes 6x more effective? Afterburners become viable - they don't blow your sig radius up and webs hurt you less.
Only issue I can see here is that battleships would be wtfpwned by webs, but you could easily make it so a ship's own signature radius, or scan resolution, or something, is taken into account when webbing. Thus, a BS can web another BS at, say, 50%, unless he lights himself up with a MWD. Frigates might be webbed 50%, but activating their MWD doesn't make their sig big enough for a BS-sized web would not increase in effectiveness. A frigate would always web at, say, 90% on a BS, since its sig radius is as large or larger than a MWD'ing frigate.
|
Matrixcvd
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 18:03:00 -
[34]
how can you have mass/inertia webbing when the ship is already in motion? i know this is not real life there are still equations which covern the mechanics. the fact is, the ship is already moving means it has attained its inertia. If this were the case, those webs would instanteously stop a ship. obviously no good, nothing wrong with webs/nano's btw
|
Marcus TheMartin
Gallente Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 18:48:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Matrixcvd nothing wrong with webs/nano's btw
aside from the fact that it renders all close range frigate sized ships dead meat in a matter of seconds
|
Megan Maynard
Minmatar Clearspace Operations Carpe Diem.
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 18:50:00 -
[36]
Inertia is a factor. Just try webbing a nano'd battleship sometime and watch it cruise out of web range.
The lack of common eve knowledge makes me ignore this thread. Miz Stelth Bomerz iz the ****nit. |
arbalesttom
Caldari Glauxian Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 18:55:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Nikea Tiber First off, I like how this is actually a constructive thread rather than a whine.
It are always the pro nano****s that start whining when someone mentions a web/mwd/nano solution, i really wonder why this didnt started yet...guess because the op is stating some good facts (without numbers though, but at this stage in this tread its not that nessecairy). Other than that, really looking forward to see more thoughts about this matter, its bout time to fix nano/mwd/ab/web in some way without gimping minnie too much..
***Warning! Sig ahead!***
Bounty: Jonny JoJo
|
Maeltstome
Minmatar D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 19:07:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Maeltstome on 11/02/2008 19:15:23 Think imma sell my rigged vaga beofre it becomes worth less than a pair of shoes.
EDIT* Constructive stuff.
Webifiers are overpowered as is stands IMO due to the overheat ability. Range is the biggest problem on them. 100mil on a faction web and most BS will be able to snag nano's worth that ten times over. If 10 nano ships are hitting you with 400dps, you die anyway, remove nano and they will just tank and then you have a REAL problem when a HAC gang arrives at your home system.
None of the proposed changes to nano (Which btw, is no where near as bad as it used to be) do anything other than hurt ships designed to go fast. In reference to the nano-online comment, what people seem to want is tank-online, which would make me simply quit due to 1 dimentional gameplay. Go out in a regular BS these days and get a fight in 0.0 - its nearly impossible to catch anything. Best way to get a fight is to be faster than your target cause people run when its not blob warfare or if they don't have the numbers advantage.
P.s
Remove warp to zero on stargates if you want to nerf nano more, so there is a chance of actually catching people on gates without a dictor or a blob. Remove the ability to drop bookmarks within 130km of stargates if insta's lagging up the server is an issue, there are plenty of warp to ranges on gates below that and wouldn't hurt *too* much to rely on them.
My points here have been a bit rushed, but you get the general idea. -------
[12:07] w33Daz: a trained 1 skill fur 24 mins n it took 2 days aff drones lvl 5 [12:07] w33Daz: A WIS LIKE WTF |
Maeltstome
Minmatar D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 19:17:00 -
[39]
Originally by: arbalesttom It are always the pro nano****s that start whining when someone mentions a web/mwd/nano solution, because they spend like bla bla bla million isk on there mods/implants/etc and that amount of isk in that specefic type of mods/implants/rigs justifies invulnerability (ofcoarse, duhh..)
if you spend the same ammount on a faction bs with tanking ability, you can perma tank about 4-5 nano ships. -------
[12:07] w33Daz: a trained 1 skill fur 24 mins n it took 2 days aff drones lvl 5 [12:07] w33Daz: A WIS LIKE WTF |
Auron Shadowbane
Pelennor Swarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 20:01:00 -
[40]
I think webs are overpowered and underranged.
especially t2. get 2 of em and you are down to 1%.
I think if webs affected mass (and therefore would only be able to negate MWD/AB but NOT a ships own speed) it would be easier to increase their range.
the deacceleraont thingy can be countered by modifying the ability value of the ceptor as well.
like "increase mass by 900% and decrease agility mod by 90%" means you have same effective agility/deacceleration but your mwd bonus is decreased by 90%.
after this "nerf" the webbers range shold be braught in line with other EW (and prolly the matari ships bonus adjusted to strenght instead of range).
this would at same time nerf the "invulnerability" of nano-setups AND increase speed/small ships survivability.
3rd thing it helps would be to make target painters viable (since they are then in conclusion with webs the only thing bare drones and udnersiced guns a big ship can sue against small ones).
|
|
arbalesttom
Caldari Glauxian Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 20:05:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Maeltstome
Originally by: arbalesttom It are always the pro nano****s that start whining when someone mentions a web/mwd/nano solution, because they spend like bla bla bla million isk on there mods/implants/etc and that amount of isk in that specefic type of mods/implants/rigs justifies invulnerability (ofcoarse, duhh..)
if you spend the same ammount on a faction bs with tanking ability, you can perma tank about 4-5 nano ships.
yeah, but if you nano up you can escape at least (if you know how to fly the ship ofcoarse), with that super duper faction tank your running nowhere (just waiting till the rest of there friends arive).
***Warning! Sig ahead!***
Bounty: Jonny JoJo
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |