Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
MenanceWhite
Amarr Red Light Navy
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 11:43:00 -
[181]
We're tired of the nano whine. Compare the amount of posts and the amount of supports of this topic and see how it shows that most people(that are'nt ******ed) thinks that nano is fine. ---
Originally by: Torfi There's alot. That can be done. With.. corpses
Originally by: Oveur
|
Matrixcvd
Caldari Rionnag Alba
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 12:25:00 -
[182]
Originally by: Pithecanthropus
Originally by: Matrixcvd
Irrelevant stuff.
Your perception is greatly flawed and far overblown. LOL.
This community has had enough with nanos. It's not about the ships we all fly, the tactics used, the counters, the blobs, or the costs. It's about the pure advantage big nanodweebs have over the rest of Eve. Period. Why are you so afraid of a nerf? Afraid of changes? Eve has changed time and time again, and THAT is what keeps the game going. The pot has settled and nano's are on top, its time to mix it up again, rebalance, and make this game yet again best for the ENTIRE community. I'm all for constant rebalances, otherwise we'll lean too far to one side and topple. Do you want an Eve with a majority of nano ships and nano counter? No. No. I hope you're not that naive.
oh god you make me puke. i'm afraid of changes when there is no need for a fix, boot.ini anyone? Just cause FW came out, doesn't mean a whole new class of idiots gets to whine about getting blown up doing stupid stuff.
I haven't been here since beta but last time i checked the years are piling up on my char and i have seen my fair share of changes and none of them have been "shaking the pot"
if you can't deal with nanos you can't PVP. There is no middle ground. I tip my hat to the CVA guys, outside the tremedous blobing they do, last time i checked they handled the nano just fine. Its just verbal poo poo to sit here and have any kind of converstation with morons
|
Janus Duo
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 12:33:00 -
[183]
I've heard all the arguments. I've flown armor, shield, and speed tanked ships. I've owned a snake set. After all my research I believe they're overpowered. Sorry.
|
Thargorr
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 12:34:00 -
[184]
As my main goes, so goes my nation.
|
Matrixcvd
Caldari Rionnag Alba
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 14:17:00 -
[185]
Originally by: Janus Duo I've heard all the arguments. I've flown armor, shield, and speed tanked ships. I've owned a snake set. After all my research I believe they're overpowered. Sorry.
i dont even fly nanos and I think they are fine so wtf does your quip add up to now?
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 15:57:00 -
[186]
Okay lets cut to the chase here. The problem is in mixing definitions in what is meant by a NANO ship. To most people complaining about nano's - NANO means: A fast cruiser hull that can choose to disengage from heavier/slower combatants after performing hit and run attacks. The reason this debate ALWAYS gets nasty is that attacking that role leads to the promoting of blob warfare and whoever has the most numbers automatically wins. Obviously large alliances with high numbers of relatively low-skilled pvpers want this.
But the debate is not that clear cut.
There is a clear difference between what is attainable with relatively conventional means: 3000-4000 (tech2 fit, polycarbs, OD's nanos, overheat) and what can be attained with rarer and costly assets (7000-10,000, with snakes, drugs, tech2 rigs rare modules).
There is absolutely no problem whatsoever with the former - its simply variety in warfare and uses speed to dictate the terms of an engagement. If outnumbered by heavier, slower hulls these "conventional nano" ships can leave, choose their range, hit and run, and generally skirmish against indisciplined targets.
Whereas the latter class (and this would include extreme implanted clones, drugged up and equipped with faction fits) can lead to hulls sustaining orbit and transversal speeds greater than the ability of the game logic to hit or counter while being able to fire back themselves.
There is a problem with extreme NANO but this is a relatively tiny proportion of the player base and such ships are very rare (for example as an FC in Star Fraction I've only ever come across a handful of Vagabonds capable of this opposing us in 0.0).
Whereas the former class (conventional NANO) is easy to counter and just requires a tiny bit of thought and re-equipping to neutralize or effectively hunt. A nano-gang moving around the 4000 mps mark has got the ability to burn out from gates or hostile hotdrop ambushes sure, but its utterly screwed by a combination of webbing recons, neutralizers, ew+interceptor webbing, sniping etc etc etc. Sure this brand of "nano" will laugh at your classic tech1 short range battleship/battlecruiser blob on a gate but really so would tech2 snipers, so would a well-fitted RR gang, so would EW superiority, etc etc and so on.
Now I'm sure we'll keep on hearing insults and angry posting from the "nerf all nano" brigade but the reality is there are two separate issues here and its wrong to mix them both up. CCP have the challenge already of looking at changes to the game that reduce the abuse potential of extreme nano speeds without reducing the whole game to mindless blobbing. They know perfectly well that small gang raiding is a part of eve and needs to be preserved. So less of the general speeding condemnation of play styles would be helpful in general and in particular - lets stop labelling "any ship that travels faster than mine" as automatically "nano".
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Ice9
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 16:47:00 -
[187]
I disagree that even the extreme nano ships that you describe Jade are actually a problem.
There are ways to counter them, there are already mechanics in place to stop these very ships *despite* the enormous cost involved in achieving the highest speeds of 10km/s and more.
I *know* these points have been made before in this thread and others but I simply want to add another voice to the many asking CCP to not dumb EVE down any further. EVE's combat mechanics are deep, varied and complex. So much so that they are often more complex than even EVE's developers themselves understand.
Player ignorance is no reason to further erode that which makes EVE special in the crowded MMORPG market - it's amazing complexity.
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 17:00:00 -
[188]
Originally by: Ice9 I disagree that even the extreme nano ships that you describe Jade are actually a problem. There are ways to counter them, there are already mechanics in place to stop these very ships *despite* the enormous cost involved in achieving the highest speeds of 10km/s and more.
Don't get me wrong please, I know there are ways to counter these things and I personally believe that the extreme cost of these things is an balancing factor - popping a tech2 rigged ship and killing a snake clone is an immense fiscal penalty. But whats actually happening is that the kind of sustainable speeds these ships can maintain at that level just don't work properly with the mathematics of tracking and hit recognition. It literally breaks the game to a degree in an unintended fashion.
The challenge for us (CSM) and us (the playbase) is to address the issue in an intelligent way so we can advise CCP on resolving the broken mechanics at the extreme top end without destroying the game functionality at the medium scale nano speed and reducing variety and imagination in space combat.
Quote: I *know* these points have been made before in this thread and others but I simply want to add another voice to the many asking CCP to not dumb EVE down any further. EVE's combat mechanics are deep, varied and complex. So much so that they are often more complex than even EVE's developers themselves understand.
Yep its all true, but I guess the issue is that currently CCP know there is a problem with top end velocity tanking in that their mechanics don't work as intended - something as simple as the mwd sig radius penalty being irrelevant because weapons simply can't track fast enough to keep on target is a case in point. Means that the sig-size penalty is meaningless. This could get addressed by re-writing the tracking/explosion speed attributes to get bonused in some way from the MWD sig penalty on the target ship but its a complex issue to balance.
So the challenge is - how to stop extreme hi end nano ships from being effectively invulnerable to weapons fire in high traversal situations without destroying the playability and combat variety provided by ordinary scale nano-ships.
Quote: Player ignorance is no reason to further erode that which makes EVE special in the crowded MMORPG market - it's amazing complexity.
Oh I definitely agree and the whole nano-issue is cursed by very ignorant opinions that see anything faster than a gate-camping drake as an abomination needing immediate nerfing. Its vitally important that ccp do not listen to people wanting to eradicate speed tanking and velocity-based disengagement and the general raiding playstyle simply because they personally refuse to adapt their loadouts and accept that in a competitive environment they need to face the challenge of other player's creativity.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Josef Amerentev
Gallente E.M.P. Industries Malum Exuro
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 17:30:00 -
[189]
would it be possible to bring back killer nos to combat nanos?
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 17:45:00 -
[190]
Originally by: Josef Amerentev would it be possible to bring back killer nos to combat nanos?
Why would that be any more effective than Neuts? If you battleship neut an orbiting nano its generally dead in the water.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 17:57:00 -
[191]
Edited by: Esmenet on 10/07/2008 17:56:45
Originally by: Ice9
Player ignorance is no reason to further erode that which makes EVE special in the crowded MMORPG market - it's amazing complexity.
Hopefully the devs will see it this way too. If they cave in to the nano whiners, we can expect the same treatment for ECM gangs, remote repping BS's and whatever tactic people start using next until we are left with only simple slugfests.
|
Kyoko Sakoda
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 21:54:00 -
[192]
Giving my support to the OP, not that the CSM or CCP will care. I'm astounded that this issue wasn't brought up prevalently at the first meeting.
That hot drops and blobs have indeed become a problem is no excuse for people, even with loads of investment, to enter PvP nigh-invincible. I'm all for fast ships that are meant to go fast in principle, but watching a Typhoon travel 5km/s and faster is more than irritating. The demand for Snakes and Rapiers (which hardly are a solution most of the time; primary = pop) is also way too high.
Ghost Festival is recruiting. |
diabolic clone
Amarr Anomaly Collective
|
Posted - 2008.07.11 14:30:00 -
[193]
Maybe the problem is the majority of ships that go really slow. Nerfing speed will utterly suck for everyone, if slower ships were somewhat faster they'd be on a better competitive level. Someone think of the children I blame the liberals.. oh wait this isn't that Simpsons episode when everyone is about to riot. I know fighting speed based ships all the time gets really boring but it is better than everyone being a snail when you consider how much distance you can travel in every solar system when doing things like mining/missioning/exploration/pvp. If the OP is calling for a speed nerf it will nuke every ship not just ones fit out entirely for speed. Take Nosferatu for example, where extremely effective more than they were intended. After the nerf I told people I had over 50 heavy diminishing power drain systems in one station, someone literally screamed at me to reprocess them for minerals.
|
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2008.07.11 14:49:00 -
[194]
Agility, fix agility and you fix the top end nano problem while still allowing speed tanks to exist. |
Pithecanthropus
|
Posted - 2008.07.11 15:28:00 -
[195]
Edited by: Pithecanthropus on 11/07/2008 15:28:20
Originally by: Matrixcvd
I haven't been here since beta but last time i checked the years are piling up on my char and i have seen my fair share of changes and none of them have been "shaking the pot"
Most changes involve taking the game into a new direction... modifying exploited loop holes and lessening the abuse. That in turn weens the player base into finding new tactics. If you been here since beta and haven't seen that, I'm dumbfounded at your lack of intelligence.
Quote: Its just verbal poo poo to sit here and have any kind of converstation with morons
Exactly... you being the worst case moron here . --------------------------------- Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man. |
Zikka
Hematite Rose Bionic Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.07.12 23:48:00 -
[196]
Jade, sorry but I still disagree.
I don't have a problem with the 7 or 10km/s ships. They take some work to deal with but as you say they are expensive and rare. They are special cases and with a bit of work they can be dealt with.
What annoys me is that most gangs we engage are nanod. No shield tanks, no armour tanks, no snipers. Nothing but a bunch of 3 or 4km/s cruisers and maybe a few dictors and inties and a falcon 200km away.
Where is the fun or variety?
A rapier in MANDATORY in a gang. If you don't have one you might as well not go out. How is that fun or flexible?
You complain about the 'blob' but I've seen just as many nano blobs as other blobs.
Bring back battleship fights, close range slugfests, snipers, and all the other things that used to happen. We fly nano ourselves, because we would be stupid not to, but that doesn't mean we think it is balanced. Let missiles actually be able to do some damage to something that isn't going two or more times the explosion velocity of even precision missiles. etc.
Let me use my tanking skills, actually give me a reason to fit a repper and some resists on my ship. Hell I even use a nano ship for ratting!
|
Marconus Orion
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.13 20:26:00 -
[197]
Blobs is the reason I fly nano. I would love to do some armor tanking but the fact is if your not nano, your not gonna stand a chance due to the bad guys opting to only engage you if they blob.
Nano lets you actually stand maybe a chance against the blob.
The percentage of ppl who learn how to do pvp tactics is growing smaller and smaller because they simply opt to blob because it requires no thought process really.
|
InfoGate1024
|
Posted - 2008.07.13 20:47:00 -
[198]
Jade sums it up, it's a no for op.
|
McTard
|
Posted - 2008.07.13 23:36:00 -
[199]
Quote: Blobs is the reason I fly nano.
And Nanos are the reason I blob.
So yeah, Speed fits need tweaking.
|
PewPewLePewPew
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 00:40:00 -
[200]
The majority of fights that I have been in and seen in 0.0 have been nano vs nano, sniper BS vs sniper BS etc, rarely have I seen nano vs sniper BS etc.
I fly nano ships and sure its nice to choose your fights etc, but imagine what happens if nano's are nerfed so they are un-playable. You would have 15 battleships spending hours to go like 40 jumps and once you get there they probably won't even fight so great, you just wasted a ton of time! Or you could fly down there in nano ships and not waste as much time.
Not to mention with the number of titan's there are now what is your fleet supposed to do when there is a dictor bubble on a gate with a cloaked titan? fly out of the bubble at 150M/s? But no wait! Fit a MWD! even that probably won't get you out alive and then at that what do you want caldari to do? Gimp there tanks?
|
|
Rn Bonnet
Free Collective The OSS
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 00:48:00 -
[201]
Quote: What annoys me is that most gangs we engage are nanod. No shield tanks, no armour tanks, no snipers. Nothing but a bunch of 3 or 4km/s cruisers and maybe a few dictors and inties and a falcon 200km away.
The reason for this is actually quite simple and has little to do with Nano's being overpowered. Roaming in a nano gang is much faster, which means potential targets have less time to respond, and you are better able to disengage (rather than safe spotting and cloaking and waiting till they leave). Remote rep battleship gangs are great, they arn't that common because it takes a lot of time to move around in them and its relatively hard to catch hose easy ganks.
I agree with jade here, people who are getting killed by "nanos" in equal numbers are not bringing comparable ship quality. If someone shows up in 10 nanohacs and a falcon you need to be showing up with 10 t2 battleships and a falcon. Here is a simple fact: 10 pulse Armageddons (t2 fit) will volley most nano ships. This combined with that in a ten man gang they will have low transversal if they move to range or are at close range (low transversal to part of the gang + high risk of getting webbed) means the ten t2 pulse Armageddons (especially if they are RR) will win almost every time if the nano gang engages at all (if you have a bubble you can generally kill one or two even if they run).
|
PewPewLePewPew
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 01:41:00 -
[202]
Originally by: Rn Bonnet
Quote: What annoys me is that most gangs we engage are nanod. No shield tanks, no armour tanks, no snipers. Nothing but a bunch of 3 or 4km/s cruisers and maybe a few dictors and inties and a falcon 200km away.
The reason for this is actually quite simple and has little to do with Nano's being overpowered. Roaming in a nano gang is much faster, which means potential targets have less time to respond, and you are better able to disengage (rather than safe spotting and cloaking and waiting till they leave). Remote rep battleship gangs are great, they arn't that common because it takes a lot of time to move around in them and its relatively hard to catch hose easy ganks.
I agree with jade here, people who are getting killed by "nanos" in equal numbers are not bringing comparable ship quality. If someone shows up in 10 nanohacs and a falcon you need to be showing up with 10 t2 battleships and a falcon. Here is a simple fact: 10 pulse Armageddons (t2 fit) will volley most nano ships. This combined with that in a ten man gang they will have low transversal if they move to range or are at close range (low transversal to part of the gang + high risk of getting webbed) means the ten t2 pulse Armageddons (especially if they are RR) will win almost every time if the nano gang engages at all (if you have a bubble you can generally kill one or two even if they run).
That's another thing, its not that nano is overpowered it is people not willing to adapt. They do the same old thing and when something counters them they complain that its overpowered.
|
Ben Derindar
Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 02:10:00 -
[203]
I agree that it shouldn't be about whoever blobs wins, but the current situation where the fastest wins is no better.
As I've said earlier, ships have been this fast before with the dual MWD/wideboy age of 2004, and in time it was nerfed. It was the right thing to do then, and it's the right thing to do now.
/Ben
|
Pithecanthropus
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 02:20:00 -
[204]
Jade, you made your fricken point a million times... why they heck you keep coming back like you need to boost your ego back up. We all dislike you anyway, you're a joke to this game and to the CSM. Now one gives a rats ass about your self-centered egotistical Jade Online agenda. Get over it... realize there are two valid sides and your opinion is just that, a lame opinion. Stop trying to defend it like you know what's best for this game. That's not your job. Your job is to listen to the players... cuz WE know what is best for this game. Not some asshat that decs noob militia corps and gets his jollies off by camping FW borders. Puh-leeeze.
Get a life.
--------------------------------- Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man. |
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 05:08:00 -
[205]
Good post(s) by Jade. I fully agree. T2 standard nanos are fine and easy to counter. Now a fully pimped, rigged, combat boosted, snake'd out nano-ship, that goes into crazy territory. Should a cruiser really be ever able to go over 12km/s? I don't think so. So I fully agree with nerfing the ridiculously fast nano-ships.
However, most of the nano-whiners are simply drake pilots who are upset that their drake doesn't pwn T2 PC cruisers like they pwn missions/rats. This has been demonstrated by looking at the combat habits of most of the nanowhiners. So no, I will never support just a nerf to speed modules/ships.
Also, I'd like to point out this thread has over 200 replies and only 40ish support, that's 20% support. Doesn't look good for the nano-whiners. --
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
Kyoko Sakoda
Caldari Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 06:52:00 -
[206]
Edited by: Kyoko Sakoda on 14/07/2008 06:54:35
Originally by: Vaal Erit However, most of the nano-whiners are simply drake pilots who are upset that their drake doesn't pwn T2 PC cruisers like they pwn missions/rats. This has been demonstrated by looking at the combat habits of most of the nanowhiners. So no, I will never support just a nerf to speed modules/ships.
Nice stereotyping of the petitioning group there. Considering many PvPers from a wide range of backgrounds think speed has gotten excessive, including my favorite friend and polycarb/snake Crow *****, you obviously have no clue.
20%-ish support is enough for the forums. Most people don't actually click the support button, and it is not indicative of exact numbers of support within the community. That there exists a multitude of threads many pages long attempting to tackle this problem is proof enough that the level-headed among the community want something done about it.
Ghost Festival is recruiting. |
Dzajic
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 07:52:00 -
[207]
I think that a moderate small nerf to moderate nano fits should be looked at. And crazy silly nano fits should be just made less available. Reworking pirate faction LP stores?
|
destinationZERO
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 08:48:00 -
[208]
no support nanos are fine learn to pvp
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 09:35:00 -
[209]
Originally by: Kyoko Sakoda Edited by: Kyoko Sakoda on 14/07/2008 06:54:35
Originally by: Vaal Erit However, most of the nano-whiners are simply drake pilots who are upset that their drake doesn't pwn T2 PC cruisers like they pwn missions/rats. This has been demonstrated by looking at the combat habits of most of the nanowhiners. So no, I will never support just a nerf to speed modules/ships.
Nice stereotyping of the petitioning group there. Considering many PvPers from a wide range of backgrounds think speed has gotten excessive, including my favorite friend and polycarb/snake Crow *****, you obviously have no clue.
20%-ish support is enough for the forums. Most people don't actually click the support button, and it is not indicative of exact numbers of support within the community. That there exists a multitude of threads many pages long attempting to tackle this problem is proof enough that the level-headed among the community want something done about it.
It is not stereotyping, it is a simple matter of using google. For instance, you fly crows and megathrons so if you talk about how a nano-HAC is totally unbalanced then we know it is certainly a one-sided viewpoint. In many nano-whine threads I have shown that the OP or rabble-rousers fly only drakes, a few like DHB Wildcat actually flies nanos, but that is an oddity.
The thumbsup/support mechanic is used a lot. It is clearly shown to everyone before they make their post and lots of people use it. The 30/90 day GTC thread has gotten over 70% support tnad that is almost 1,000 posts. 20% is a very low number for support if you actually looked at popular threads and you know compared them instead of just trolling. --
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
Zikka
Hematite Rose Bionic Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 10:13:00 -
[210]
Originally by: Vaal Erit
It is not stereotyping, it is a simple matter of using google. For instance, you fly crows and megathrons so if you talk about how a nano-HAC is totally unbalanced then we know it is certainly a one-sided viewpoint. In many nano-whine threads I have shown that the OP or rabble-rousers fly only drakes, a few like DHB Wildcat actually flies nanos, but that is an oddity.
The thumbsup/support mechanic is used a lot. It is clearly shown to everyone before they make their post and lots of people use it. The 30/90 day GTC thread has gotten over 70% support tnad that is almost 1,000 posts. 20% is a very low number for support if you actually looked at popular threads and you know compared them instead of just trolling.
Except that this post has a lot of people arguing back and forth and you can only show support once.
(For example no thumbs up on this post because I already posted with a thumbs up earlier).
Look me up on the killboards if you want - I've been flying virtually nothing but nano-hacs and nano-rapiers so far this year. I've killed plenty of nano ships, and I've lost a couple of nano ships.
Not a drake in sight.
The problem with nanos is they essentially have no drawbacks. They can choose their fight, tank infinite amounts of incoming damage, roam fast, tackle, deal ok damage - all in one handy versatile package. I'm not stupid so I fly them myself - that doesn't mean I think they are balanced or that I will cry when they are gone though.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |