Ships & Modules

They are not doing full damage. Scorch does notably less damage than faction MF. They also are giving up damage mods for range mods, and using low-tracking pulse lasers. In fact, the tracking is especially notable because these same ships will NOT be doing full damage by close range unless the target stands still.



Fighting outside of scram range means two things.


1) You're going to be vulnerable if the enemy should close on you and get into scram range, and

2) Your opponent is also less committed to the fight.


You're right that people don't commit very much (though I don't agree at all that this is a new phenomenon; Vagabonds were the most popular HAC well before the falloff boost to TEs). I would blame the fact that people refuse to commit, however, on the fact that people are afraid of losses. People are afraid of losses because they're afraid that they might mess up their sweet killboard stats.

And if they mess up their KB stats, ~pro pvpers~ will laugh at them with snarky comments like




because certain baddies in EVE take KB stats as a measure of skill.

that's why people don't like to commit. Not because kiting is overpowered, or because range is too large.

Yes i know that scorch does less damage, but they are still applying there full dps with that ammo type, add in a few rapiers/huginn/loki with webs some arazus/proteus you have a gang with long range tackle, big tanks and can apply a lot of dps at good ranges. Im not arguing that it destroys small scale warfare, im arguing that tracking enchancers give too much extra range to close range weapons, especially to ships with range bonuses and this effects a lot of different mods and ships in pvp.

I know people have always been risk adverse, but its just getting silly now, vagas that can hit up to 44km, yes i know the dps is rubbish at this range, but 44km with mid tier medium close range guns is daft.

I dont claim to be a pro pvper but you was the one who brought a personal attack at the op claiming he doesnt know what hes talking about, i just commented he has a very good pvp track record compared to yours so to claim he knows nothing was just a petty insult on your part like mine about pvp records was.

The thread title is that 95% of small scale PvP is dead. My hypothesis is that it is actually 36.91% dead.

1) Nano nerf
More like "people are afraid of committing to a fight". Like in supercaps' logoffski being nerfed, and like nano kiting BCs need a nerf, being more committed to a fight brings more explosions and thus less staleness.

Also, battleships going faster than interceptors is broken and should have never been a thing.

2) Resulting Web nerf that came with nano nerf
I think 100MN ships are due for a nerf, and even so they take ages to spin up to their full speed, and are incredibly easy to evade. Just like you don't give people in 100 man Drake blobs fights, don't give 100MN AB Tengus fights and they will have an incentive to fly something else.

If you're having trouble hitting webbed things, you are picking the wrong targets, or have far more severe problems. I, for one, want my frigates to be able to stand a chance at surviving against bigger ships. Webs make that possible.

3) HP Buff
I'm not sure alpha setups need to be more powerful than they already are.

4) Jump bridges / covert cynos / capital ships period
"Am I a part of the cure? Or am I part of the disease?" For complaining about this you sure do a lot of black ops work yourself. I do small gang PvP and have never lost a ship to a hotdrop (and have only been hotdropped twice in more than two years). I fail to see your point.

5) Nos nerf / Neut Buff
Fair point, nosferatus are far underpowered as they are now, particularly because of their fittings. Neuts are also very prevalent because the only other reasonable thing to ever put in an utility high slot is a Salvager. Some reason to use those high slots for other modules would be nice.

If you're fitting ships with 2 cap boosters just to counteract neuts, I'm not sure you're qualified to comment on neuts.

6) ECM drones
They are absolutely horrible to run into, but they're not even close to as good as a full-skilled Falcon. They may be overpowered, but not by much. Rather, all other EW drones are underpowered.

7) Local
As it's always been here, I'm not sure how it "killed" anything. Local channel removal is a giant can of worms and a different topic, though. I happen to agree, and would actually go as far as saying that intel in general is too easy to passively come by in Eve (local, killmails/killboards, map API, etc).

8) Tracking Enhancers
On the fence, here. I agree that there is too much kiting douchebaggery, but a mass nerf (particularly to tier 2 BCs) would be better for fixing that than a blanket TE nerf.

9) Logi ships
Get your gang an interceptor. Otherwise, logi will be getting aggression with the new crimewatch system coming in Inferno. You may want to check some of that out.

10) POS warfare
Have you... done any kind of sov warfare since Dominion? If not, please refrain from commenting on it.

Wait, you think it should be possible to meaningfully challenge sovereignty SOLO?

Wow, that's a lot of easy mode you're asking for there. I will grant you that two solo ships should generally be able to engage each other meaningfully if fit properly, but the rest is a lot of tears to no real purpose. Of course if someone has friends that leap to his defense you're at a disadvantage, that's the entire point of having buddies in a videogame.

There's plenty of solo/small gang stuff going on, go to any lowsec system, w-space system, or even most of NPC 0.0. If you're going to hang out in the official large campaign section of the game you don't get to ***** that there's not much going on there besides large, structured campaigns.

Gonna have to disagree on that one. Yeah losses being a pain are a factor, but when so much of a PVPers worth is placed in his k/d ratio (absurd though it may be as an indicator of anything), it'd be silly to think that losses messing up his perceived pvp skills aren't a major factor in people being weenies when it comes to losing ships.

I have not encountered a single corp that (seriously) says, "lol you k/d ratio and isk efficiency are too low!" If you guys know of any, tell us so we can all point and laugh.

OTOH, I see people who frequently avoid even(ish) fights because "I can't afford to replace this."

The very essence of a successful solo PvPer is picking your fights and only committing to fights you can win. You are complaining that there are ships that don't require people to commit to PvP - but that is the very thing that makes effective solo PvP possible!

I think the phrase goes "don't fly what you can't afford to lose", not "don't fly what you can't afford to replace". Flying ships that you only ever use to engage in really one-sided fights is fine and all, but In my opinion it cheapens the thrill of the kill. Fighting a Rifter with my Dramiel? Meh. Fighting an Ishkur with my Dramiel? Great fun!

Gudfites™ for all!

Didnt the nano make it fairly easy to make ships that were completely untouchable though? Thats bad any way you look at it



Those two sayings are why you GET ppl that are what ppl call "risk averse" cause they CANT easily afford to replace what theyre flying. And not everyone has the disposable income to support buying PLEX to sell

Most of my money comes from a trading alt, an alt running a small independent business, and lowsec exploration on Petrus. If I were to fly Machariel after Machariel, it would likely not be enough. When I fly ships, though, I fly them in situations that are in my favor, that are even, and even in some where I am outmatched.

I have been doing so since I was a newbie throwing Rifters around. The only difference is that the ships that I can now "afford to lose", or in other words, "engage in fights that have the real possibility of going sideways" are now more expensive and more specialized.

An AF gang that engages cruiser or BC gangs is admirable. Being able to be successful in that situation is even more admirable, but it won't happen 100% of the time. This would cause them to appear "worse" than risk averse people who only engage T1 frigates in a similar AF gang because they "can't afford to lose".

A "risk averse" PvPer who flies a mega-blinged-out ship that he "can't afford to lose" and only engages weaker ships while using cheap gimmicks to ensure victory is really not that much better than a L4 mission runner: using formulaic setups to see numbers tick up.

That is what I mean by needing more risk in Eve. We need less "easy mode" PvP, less easy GTFOing (or more rewards for flying a ship that cannot GTFO easily), and more actual fights and explosions. And yes, that includes my own explosions. A good fight is a good fight no matter the victor.