Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dinique
Caldari The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:02:00 -
[1]
aka Sarmaul is better than CCP
As an alternate solution to the "Speed Problem", I ask that CCP considers the following solution proposed by Sarmaul:
1) When an MWD is activated, all weapon systems are deactivated and can only be reactivated once the MWD is turned off. Turrets, Drones, Launchers and Smartbombs stop dealing damage completely while the MWD is active. 2) Afterburner speeds are increased
This achieves the following:
1) MWDs are used for Rapid Positioning: getting into a fight, getting out of a fight or charging down enemies. 2) Disengaging becomes more difficult for MWD users: When you attempt to disengage by MWDing away, you can't kill the ceptor that is chasing you down anymore with low transversal. If the tackling ship catches up to you, you are in real trouble. 3) ABs are used for fighting. 4) Pure tackling ships can still use their MWD and tackle.
This change along with some other tweaks (such as nerfing polycarbons and nerfing snake implants) can balance the speed problem entirely. _____ The species has amused itself to death
|
Nrom Gustav
Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:05:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Nrom Gustav on 05/08/2008 19:05:43 For Great Justice.
Also, 1st. |
Vanden
The Children of Naught
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:08:00 -
[3]
Mix that with reduced webs and you've got a deal.
|
Red Thunder
Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:09:00 -
[4]
this is harsher than ccps idea....at least vagas kinda survived then
-against-
Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines |
RuriHoshino
Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:16:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Red Thunder this is harsher than ccps idea....at least vagas kinda survived then
-against-
How? How? Honestly, explain this line of reasoning. Please. Under this new proposal, the Vagabond gets to keep it's speed, but loses it's ability to solowtfpwn ratting Ravens and the like, which seems to be people's primary beef with the ship.
Not to mention that this removes the need for all the other unfathomable changes, like the increased mass for Minmatar battleships, the newfound utter uselessness of medium and large blaster ships, and the forced obsolescence of interceptors.
This is the most sensible and elegant solution to a "problem" that was, in all honesty, quite limited and manageable to begin with. ________________
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=840290Support a Real, Reasonable Change to |
Mikhalio
KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:19:00 -
[6]
/sign
|
Dinique
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:21:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Red Thunder this is harsher than ccps idea....at least vagas kinda survived then
-against-
I disagree, and the Vagabond is by far my favourite ship and has been for a very long time.
This fixes the problems with ships such as the Ishtar, that were able to do more or less full damage even while running their MWD.
Will this make the Vagabond's life harder than what it is on TQ currently? Definitely.
This change, especially with the web changes, would be great. _____ The species has amused itself to death
|
Marya Sklodowska
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:21:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Marya Sklodowska on 05/08/2008 19:22:31
Originally by: Red Thunder this is harsher than ccps idea....at least vagas kinda survived then
-against-
Yes, it hurts the escape prospects of a vaga facing a fleet with interceptors, but if you think this plan is worse for the vaga then it's obvious you've never flown one.
Vagas already do virtually no damage orbiting with the mwd on due to tracking. The ships that Sarmaul's proposal hurts the most are the nanoishtar and nanosac, who were imbalanced due to their ability to orbit an opponent at mwd speeds while doing full damage. Raivi's Research Alt -Explosion Matrix- Support Sarmaul's MWD MKII |
Dinique
Caldari The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:24:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Mikhalio /sign
Remember to click the "Support this topic" checkbox if you agree ;) _____ The species has amused itself to death
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:25:00 -
[10]
Okay I kinda like it.
Definitely have something here.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
|
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:28:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Okay I kinda like it.
Definitely have something here.
ADSFSADFSADFASDASFASD!
WOW! CHECK THIS OUT!
But, this idea has my support.
|
Hehulk
Black Sea Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:29:00 -
[12]
Fixes nanos without rendering ceptors and blasters useless. Get's my vote ----------
It's great being minmatar, ain't it |
Mikhalio
KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:30:00 -
[13]
Sar's idea is slightly more eloquent and would require less code / ship overhauling.
|
Trojanman190
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:32:00 -
[14]
This idea rocks.
And he's changing two modules...
How many ships / modules is ccp changing in this one patch??? Oh yea... all of them.
Fire those responsible for the nano nerf and hire this guy!
|
Vlad Cetes
Heretic Militia
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:34:00 -
[15]
It's balanced between reducing the uber speed, yet still allowing ships that need (ceptors, blasterboats, etc) use speed. Good idea.
I do not see why man should not be just as cruel as nature. |
Aceoil
Watch Repair
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:45:00 -
[16]
I would like to see this idea tested out on SiSi.
It still needs some tweaking me thinks, but the rest of those little things will show up in testing.
|
Tony O
Midnight Captains
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:49:00 -
[17]
Looks good, tastes good too!
|
benzy
Minmatar Aetas Inculta
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:54:00 -
[18]
Supported. It makes sense, still leaves those who depend on their MWD to tackle to maintain their already low survivability in combat, provides a strong bonus with fitting either module in 0.0, keeps the MWD bonus of certain gallente ships intact, and...and...
Well, there's too much nifty stuff this idea "handles".
Supported.
benzy
|
Six Strangelove
Quam Singulari
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:55:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Six Strangelove on 05/08/2008 19:55:30 I support this idea. ----
|
Marya Sklodowska
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:57:00 -
[20]
One great aspect of this plan that I haven't heard mentioned is that it maintains the balance of bubble camps in 0.0, allowing a prepared pilot to have a chance of reapproaching the gate under fire.
----------------------------------- Raivi's Research Alt -Explosion Matrix- Support Sarmaul's MWD MKII |
|
Jantix Shafalcon
Exanimo Inc
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 20:08:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Jantix Shafalcon on 05/08/2008 20:10:17 So simple... yet so effective.
Should scrams still turn off MWD's? |
Raather
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 20:08:00 -
[22]
Good idea, only bad thing I can think of is that it would kill interceptor dog fights.
Maybe Interceptor's get a ship bonus making them immune to the change? Can't really see any balance problems with that.
|
Mira O'karr
Templars of Space
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 20:10:00 -
[23]
i like.
ccp sarmaul imho.
|
Freia Lenneth
Bad News Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 20:12:00 -
[24]
/signed (yeah yeah I know ...). |
Aypse
Fifth Faction
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 20:23:00 -
[25]
Sounds much better than the current changes on sisi thats for sure.
Reducing the mechanics that reward blobbing: Eve-O Forum Link |
Weirda
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 20:30:00 -
[26]
Weirda support - this interesting and may just work. Would not like to lose other changes though *cough Assault Frigate boost* __ Weirda
|
Lachesis Moirae
Anqara Expeditions The OSS
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 20:36:00 -
[27]
Pretty decent idea, and much less of a sweeping change than what is currently on Sisi. I'd be willing to give it a try.
|
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 20:41:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Mikhalio Sar's idea is slightly more eloquent and would require less code / ship overhauling.
It's intelligent feedback like this that we all wish we could get.
|
RuriHoshino
Minmatar Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 20:50:00 -
[29]
Well, it also has the advantage of obviating, rather than making further adjustments to, the changes currently on Sisi. Since such sweeping changes have resulted in all sorts of unintended consequences, it should be clear that the simpler the solution the better for all involved.
In all fairness, I do find it annoying that missiles currently have no "second counter" aside from ECM. If defenders worked, I might feel differently. But point defense of some kind certainly would go a long way towards evening the odds against missile spammers in the new, slower galaxy we're all soon to be inhabiting
Support a Real, Reasonable Change to Speed |
Furb Killer
Gallente The first genesis Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 21:01:00 -
[30]
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |