Looks like the nanonerf is coming

[Amarr HM]

Logoffski time!

Yeh that would have worked too anything but what I actually did would have worked.

[lac]

It's a good time to start training up battlecruisers if you haven't already. You might be able to get it to 5 before the patch.

Making battlecruisers awesome for pvp while creating an entertaining and rewarding niche for those who fly hac's would be a brilliant move to close the gap between younger and older players. If they can balance this right it could do wonders for their player retention.

[Jayce]

What's up with battlecruisers?  I think I missed something.

[MahrinSkel]

They've been the bastard stepchildren of the ship classes since the beginning.  Big enough to take full damage from battleship weapons, not fast enough to dodge them, and not enough firepower to dominate cruisers the way destroyers do against frigates.  Since Invention dropped the price of HAC's enough to make them something other than a mission-runner's toy and Carriers took over for running Gang modules in fleets, they've been pretty much useless.

--Dave

[Kitsune]

Figures that I only just now bought an Ishtar.  I'm contemplating putting it back up on the market.  I'd never meant to nano it, was gonna use it as a speedier Dominix for mission running, but if HACs are hurting that bad on Sisi I'm inclined to scrap my designs of flying an Ishtar and Zealot.  I can fly battleships; going around in a HAC was just an expensive fondness for cruisers and their agility mingled with a desire for something closer to a battleship's tank.

[LC]

It's a good time to start training up battlecruisers if you haven't already. You might be able to get it to 5 before the patch.

Making battlecruisers awesome for pvp while creating an entertaining and rewarding niche for those who fly hac's would be a brilliant move to close the gap between younger and older players. If they can balance this right it could do wonders for their player retention.

They might be useful as anti-frigate support in a fleet after the nerf. The problem will be cost effectiveness. A battlecruiser will have more survivability, and about the same firepower. You lose around $120 - 150 mil every time a hac gets popped, or 20 - 50 mil when a BC pops. Which one would you rather fly?

[Amarr HM]

Seems they have fixed the inertia on SISI non nano ships aren't effected anymore which is a really good thing and nano ships feel a bit more like the old style with just less speed so this is a good compromise so far. I ran an armor tanking Ishtar in FFA1 I managed to 1v1 two zealots and a devoter before getting blobbled so its an improvement.

[Amarr HM]

This might tickle you, Amarr's carebear whine example number 1

[ 2008.08.07 12:01:38 ] Amarr Holymight > Was there changes to the inertia?
[ 2008.08.07 12:03:45 ] Kepakh > yes
[ 2008.08.07 12:08:34 ] Amarr Holymight > oh good
[ 2008.08.07 12:14:38 ] Kepakh > well, it depends..
[ 2008.08.07 12:15:09 ] Amarr Holymight > on?
[ 2008.08.07 12:18:10 ] Kepakh > You warp faster so it will be difficult to catch anything....along with ludicrous speed we got now...
[ 2008.08.07 12:20:43 ] Amarr Holymight > Don't be a noob
[ 2008.08.07 12:21:13 ] Kepakh > huh?
[ 2008.08.07 12:22:32 ] Amarr Holymight > Faster warping affects every ship in the game not just these guys going ludicrous speeds
[ 2008.08.07 12:23:01 ] Amarr Holymight > Don't nerf the game just cause you want to catch some guys who keep running away from you learn how to tackle instead
[ 2008.08.07 12:23:12 ] Kepakh > ...
[ 2008.08.07 12:23:40 ] Kepakh > Seems like you are the first time on Sisi since patch was applied..
[ 2008.08.07 12:23:57 ] Amarr Holymight > Nope been on it plenty
[ 2008.08.07 12:24:24 ] Kepakh > Well, you can try to catch me when 50km away
[ 2008.08.07 12:24:53 ] Amarr Holymight > Your on SISI bro it's not a real game scenario
[ 2008.08.07 12:25:18 ] Kepakh > Huh?
[ 2008.08.07 12:27:27 ] Kepakh > I am gonna fit AB+Scram+Web and just start warping away lauching at you burning your cap while MWDing towards me with ludicrous 1.5km/s speed. If you still manage to put a point on me, I will just laugh even harder when turning tank+neuts on you...
[ 2008.08.07 12:27:47 ] Kepakh > that is patch supported gameplay..
[ 2008.08.07 12:28:21 ] Kepakh > laughing*
[ 2008.08.07 12:29:03 ] Amarr Holymight > Get a life

[TheDreamr]

Tinfoil hats at the ready...

The speed changes have been rolled back on Singularity. There will be a devblog with a more elaborate explanation.

You will be able to continue testing them on Multiplicity, once a new mirror is in place there.

http://www.eve-search.com/thread/601088/page/7#190

[Endie]

I imagine that they realised how much time to fine-tune these are going to take, and didn't want to block other releases ion the meantime.  Forking would be... undesirable.

[Amarr HM]

I threw a fit together last night to see what they were talking about its a Crow with max speed fit does about 52km/s then I looked at all the ways of reducing it to 20km/s or around without effecting the game for everyone.

Domination Overdrive Injector
Domination Overdrive Injector
Domination Overdrive Injector

Gistii A-Type 1MN MicroWarpdrive

Polycarbon Engine Housing II
Polycarbon Engine Housing II

Heres my suggestions

First change x-boosters to only effect sig radius as suggested in blog seems like good tradeoff.
This brings it down to...
43.9km/s

Change Polycarbons Mass -10% for T2 & Mass -5% for T1 they were overpowered in the first place.

36.6km/s

Skill: Skirmish Warfare - 10% velocityBonus split this to -5% velocity and -5% inertia bonus

34.9km/s

Module: Skirmish Warfare Link - Rapid Deployment 28.81% (Nozh wrote 38.8%) speedFactor reduce this to 18%, it was way high to begin with.

31km/s

Pirate Implants - Snake - 53.63% velocityBonus change to circa 45% won't make them useless
Shaqil's speed enhancer - 8% speedFactor leave it
Zors custom navigation 5% speedFactor - change to effect some other attribute like inertia or sig radius

26.5km/s

Nanofiber Internal Structure -  -12.5% massBonus
Overdrive Injector System - 22% velocityBonus change to 17%

23.9km/s

Overheating

Overheating MWD - speedFactor +50% change to 33%

Voila

21.3km/s

Overheating isn't viable ship option only lasts for short burts so the base speed of this ship is 16.5km/s that sounds pretty inline with a ship & pod that costs 10billion. Ludicrous speed is reduced over 50% without affecting Eve too much.

A Vaga with similar setup is reduced to 18.5 km/s from 35km/s. The high end setups cost billions and are only availaible to people with ridiculous cash to blow and alts/buddies with uber gang skills so in the rarest of rare occasions you will see a crow do 16.5km/s (21.9 w/overheating) sounds fair to me and not physics engine breaking I would imagine.

[LC]

Guess I should hold on to a few of my ishtars.

[Slayerik]

Wow a new LC avatar!

[LC]

Wow a new LC avatar!

It was inevitable.

[Jayce]

Wow a new Slay avatar!


Ganking for God and Country.

[Grand Design]

America, fuck yeah!

[eldaec]

I threw a fit together last night to see what they were talking about its a Crow with max speed fit does about 52km/s then I looked at all the ways of reducing it to 20km/s or around without effecting the game for everyone.

My concern with all of this is that I'm not sure why we care about Crows going 52 km s^-1.

Are fast interceptors really a problem?


Imo they need to leave the modules well alone, add somekind of universal penalty curve to top speeds (something similar to the stacking penalty eg. top speeds of 5k are reduced by 20%, top speeds of 10k are reduced by 40%, and so on the way up). Then exempt interceptors from the penalty. Job done.

[Slayerik]

America, fuck yeah!

This.



Hey, I figured with the Olympics and shit...represent the U S of A !!!!

[Amarr HM]

Eldaec did you read nozh's blog? Who are this we?

Currently we’ve got a number of different systems that affect speed that aren’t stacking nerfed towards each other, resulting in phenomenal speed that in turn results in near invulnerability. At the office we refer to this as “ludicrous speed”.

I used a crow as an example of the fastest ship going the fastest speed if I could get that down to a more palatable speed then it would obviously filter down through all ship types preventing ludicrous speeds across the board. I wasn't saying any particular ship is a problem merely trying to prevent ludicrous speed

If one then takes a look at the max velocity on missiles and drones, it is readily apparent that our combat system was never designed for such speeds. Even when we did some basic tests on our internal servers, with special high-speed missiles, we quickly noticed Destiny (our physics engine) behaving very strangely."
Speed must never reach ludicrous speed, which is defined as speeds where missiles and
drones don't intercept the class of ship they were intended for.

This is easy speed up drones and missiles aswell as slowing down ships don't just go straight for the jugular vOv.

Also note Nozh's blog is full of hyberbole and misinformation I don't know who the guy is but he doesn't sound like he knows much about Eve as its played currently.

What’s more is that speed, alas, can only be countered properly with yet more speed, and so on in a dreadfully unidirectional tipping of the scales. There is no tension, just increasing slack. This is bad.

Who told him this cause they lied to him.

Then there is also the size/price factor; why would I spend ISK on a sleek, fragile interceptor (that’s lithe and quick, supposedly), when I can just spend the money on a more durable heavy assault cruiser and reach even greater speeds?

There's no way a HAC can outrun an interceptor with the current system and you could have twenty interceptors for the price of a HAC what system of logic is this guy using here to draw this conclusion. For instance I could say, why buy a battleship when I could buy a carrier its more durable and tanks way more? something has to be done about these carriers being better than battleships or noone will use battleships anymore!

[Amarr HM]

Also note when I said Crow as fastest ship I meant fastest shiptype before the pedant brigade steps in.

[TripleDES]

My concern with all of this is that I'm not sure why we care about Crows going 52 km s^-1.

What!

In!

The!

Fuck!

When I left the game, I think it is almost two years now, it was considered a feat to push interceptors to 10-12km/s. Now it's 50km/s? How fucked up did the game become by now?!

[bhodi]

The only crow going 52km/sec is the one that is fitted with 6 billion worth of mods.

In other words, they don't exist except on sisi to win speed records.

[Phildo]

Not only that but it needs a high-SP buddy in a command ship (specifically a Claymroe) in the system with him to pass on more ridiculous speed bonuses.

And the Crow is not one of the faster interceptors.  Try it with a Claw some time.

[eldaec]

I still don't know why I care that someone can spend hundreds of millions of ISK to get something that might as well not be there.

What the fuck is an interceptor going to do to anyone whilst travelling at Mach 153?

The minimum orbital radius at that speed is around double the ship's targeting range.

On a flyby you'd be in the interceptor's targeting range for approximately 1.5 seconds, disruptor range for 1.0 seconds, and weapons range for more or less 0.5 seconds. I don't care that I can't hit that guy because he can't do shit to me either.


tbh, I'm not convinced there is any sub-light speed that could make an interceptor overpowered.

Now if you could get down to sub-half-second align time along with crazy speed, things might get interesting. Equally if you could start to get into the range of 10^15 m/s top speed, that would be cool, at that point interstellar direct flight starts to become practical.

[Amarr HM]

Not only that but it needs a high-SP buddy in a command ship (specifically a Claymroe) in the system with him to pass on more ridiculous speed bonuses.

And the Crow is not one of the faster interceptors.  Try it with a Claw some time.

Sader is the fastest whats ur point?

[Phildo]

Just that you can conceivably get an interceptor even faster than the one you posted.  Just reiterating what I was talking about in corp the other day for t'others to see.

[Amarr HM]

Ah ok ;) yeh sader does 60km/s think claw does 58km/s thats prolly the max speed possible.

[Endie]

My concern with all of this is that I'm not sure why we care about Crows going 52 km s^-1.

Eldaec did you read nozh's blog? Who are this we?

What Eldaec means, I think, is that the blog was directed mainly at cruiser-class ships that could move at frigate-class speeds and maneuvrability.  10-billion-ISK theorycrafted crows that orbit far outside disruptor and weapons range aren't really a threat to anyone, beyond being nice scouts.  CCP say that the point of this is that they want ships to be hittable by the drones and weapons that were designed to engage them, which seems fair.

[Nerf]

I'm all for the nanonerf, I'd much rather fly t1 ships than spend 200mil+ on a rigged HAC.  Those 200mil losses fucking hurt, even when you've got 3 commas in your wallet.

[Amarr HM]

My concern with all of this is that I'm not sure why we care about Crows going 52 km s^-1.

Eldaec did you read nozh's blog? Who are this we?

What Eldaec means, I think, is that the blog was directed mainly at cruiser-class ships that could move at frigate-class speeds and maneuvrability.  10-billion-ISK theorycrafted crows that orbit far outside disruptor and weapons range aren't really a threat to anyone, beyond being nice scouts.  CCP say that the point of this is that they want ships to be hittable by the drones and weapons that were designed to engage them, which seems fair.

Ah if that's case apologies Eldaec, I just see it as a nerf to Ludicrous speeds but there is some amount of divergence on the HAC/cruiser class ship.

[eldaec]

My concern with all of this is that I'm not sure why we care about Crows going 52 km s^-1.

Eldaec did you read nozh's blog? Who are this we?

What Eldaec means, I think, is that the blog was directed mainly at cruiser-class ships that could move at frigate-class speeds and maneuvrability.  10-billion-ISK theorycrafted crows that orbit far outside disruptor and weapons range aren't really a threat to anyone, beyond being nice scouts.  CCP say that the point of this is that they want ships to be hittable by the drones and weapons that were designed to engage them, which seems fair.

Ah if that's case apologies Eldaec, I just see it as a nerf to Ludicrous speeds but there is some amount of divergence on the HAC/cruiser class ship.

Pretty much.

And the blog is right about HACs.

It's just silly to be also nerfing things that are already balanced even at 116000 mph.

[Amarr HM]

Well if you means HACs then I disagree if you mean Vagabonds then fair enough.

[Murgos]

I didn't think the nano problem was with the speed of interceptors.  I thought the problem was HAC's that were able to engage and disengage at will which provides a disproportionate advantage?

[Amarr HM]

I didn't think the nano problem was with the speed of interceptors.  I thought the problem was HAC's that were able to engage and disengage at will which provides a disproportionate advantage?

This is just conjencture please provide evidence.

[Endie]

I didn't think the nano problem was with the speed of interceptors.  I thought the problem was HAC's that were able to engage and disengage at will which provides a disproportionate advantage?

This is just conjencture please provide evidence.

Are you saying that the point of nanohacs is not to dictate the terms of the engagement?