EVE Evolved: The nano problem
Filed under: Sci-fi, EVE Online, Forums, Game mechanics, PvP, Opinion, EVE Evolved

Not so long ago, the arguments were about nosferatu used on a Dominix being unbalanced and remote sensor dampeners being too powerful. Discussions about of these led to some re-balancing to help level the PvP playing field. The latest argument is about nano-fit ships and nano-gangs. The "nano" craze is a PvP ship fitting style and fighting strategy that favours speed over all else. Ships like the Sacrilege and the Ishtar which might normally be fitted with heavy tanks are instead fitted for high speed and agility. Rather than resist and repair damage, a ship with high speed and agility can evade enemy fire altogether. A nano-fit ship can orbit an enemy so quickly that the enemy's turrets can't track them and missiles deal tiny amounts of damage.
With some pilots claiming that viable counter-maneuvers exist to combat the nano craze and others calling it "easy mode for PvP", it's hard to know what to think. Read on while I delve into this controversial issue and draw some important conclusions.

What IS a nano ship?:
Although the word "nano" refers to the module Nanofiber Internal Structure, the term has come to mean any ship that is so fast that it can use its speed as a complete defense mechanism. The nano craze isn't all that new, it first took hold over a year ago with devastating results and was subsequently the focus of a major re-balancing efforts on ship speed. Although battleships which can fly faster than interceptors are more or less a thing of the past, cruisers and their tech 2 variants are still kings of speed when fitted for it. Heavy assault cruisers like the Ishtar that were intended to have heavy tanks can be made to fly faster than the average interceptor. In addition, ships which already lend themselves well to high speed such as the Stabber and the Vagabond can reach absolutely ludicrous speeds that simply can't be matched.
All players living in alliance-owned 0.0 space will be familiar with the daily sight of roaming gangs invading their space and every one of them will tell you the same thing - It's always gangs of Vagabonds. In 0.0 PvP where players will tend to choose the safest and most effective options, the Vagabond is almost the sole choice for roaming gangs. In recent months, rich players have been using expensive speed setups for other heavy assault cruisers like the Ishtar and the Sacrilege which come close to the Vagabond's speed and survivability. The issue that most players have with this is that so-called "speed tanks" have always been intended to be the sole domain of small, fragile ships like frigates and interceptors that have limited fire-power. Nano-fit heavy assault cruisers can do considerable damage despite their nigh-invulnerability and are tough enough to survive if someone gets a few lucky shots in.
Speed freak:

At this point, you're probably wondering what all the fuss is about and just how fast you can get your ship to go. Thanks to the very handy program "EVE Fitting Tool", it's trivial to construct theoretical ship setups and see what speeds they can achieve. Using rigs and Tech 2 equipment, an Ishtar can be made to reach over 3,000m/s but this isn't anywhere near the blistering speed of the average nano-fit ship. To reach speeds of over 9,600m/s in an Ishtar and be able to outrun the average interceptor will require the best gear money can buy.
The most important thing to realise is that while a good nano-fit is almost impossible to kill in the hands of an experienced pilot, it's not going to be cheap. To reach the ludicrous speeds of almost 10km/s in an Ishtar, a powerful deadspace microwarpdrive and a full "snake" pirate implant set are required along with the rare and expensive "Zor's Custom Navigation Hyper-Link" and "Shaqil's Speed Enhancer" implants. Using similar gear, a Vagabond tops out at around 16,500m/s. Actual setups will usually have lower than optimal speed and a pilot may choose to sacrifice some speed to enhance agility by fitting an inertial stabiliser or two. Better agility will allow them to orbit close to a target while still doing close to full speed and will enhance their rate of acceleration.
Some surprising results can be found when testing theoretical nano-fit battleship setups. The Raven tops out at scary 6,443m/s and the popular drone ship Dominix can theoretically reach speeds of 7,163m/s. An average interceptor, the class of ship which is designed to be the fastest in the game, cannot exceed around 8,500m/s. Using the same implants and the same quality of modules, an interceptor can potentially exceed 20km/second but its defenses will be paper thin. Chasing an enemy nano-Ishtar or vagabond could end up turning your expensive interceptor into an expensive wreck.
Defining the problem:
In each performance of the "nerf the flavour of the month" play, one key theme is always present. Whether someone is on one side of the debate or the other, very few people attempt to formally define the problem that exists. Even some of the players suggesting potential solutions don't specify what problem their suggestion actually solves. Common sense would dictate that the problem with nano-fit ships and tactics is that ships are able to go too fast but common sense is sometimes a bit slow. At the crux of this issue is the question of whether or not there is a valid counter-maneuver to use against a nano-gang. Massive speed and a skilled pilot neutralises most of the threat from turrets, missiles, drones, warp disruptors, energy neutralisers and smartbombs. Without an effective counter-maneuver, the field of play would be biased toward the nano-fit ship.
A player who has never encountered a skilled nano gang might suggest that one counter-maneuver would be heavy use of stasis webs to slow the enemy ships down. As nano-fittings leave little room for any real kind of tank, slowing them down would assure their destruction. Unfortunately, it's not that simple. While the enemy ships can be completely effective from up to 20km away, normal stasis webs have a range limit of 10km. Even overheating an expensive faction web won't put its range much above 14km. The second and perhaps most shocking fact about webs is that even if the enemy does get in range, webs won't even slow them down .
The web problem:

If your gang is using ships that specialise in long-range webbing such as the Rapier or Huginn, the enemy is very likely to stray within web range during the fight. Unfortunately, webbing a skilled nano-fit pilot won't stop him or even slow him down significantly. Instead, his ship will continue along its current trajectory at great speed and exit your stasis web range with little effect to his overall speed. This is partly due to a small oversight in a change that happened to stasis webs many years ago. Originally, stasis webs only reduced a ship's maximum speed but this was augmented with a hidden secondary effect. The secondary effect was a reduction in the target's agility, making them turn slower.
This seemingly cosmetic change is actually a major contributing factor to why webs don't scare nano-ship pilots. When an enemy ship is webbed, their maximum speed is cut down significantly but they don't slow to match it immediately. Instead, they begin to decelerate toward their new maximum speed at a rate of deceleration based on the ship's agility. The higher the ship's agility, the faster the ship will slow down. Since the web has decreased the target's agility, their ship decelerates a lot slower than normal. This causes their ship to maintain most of their original speed for long enough to coast out of web range and on to freedom.
The speed problem:
Putting the web problem aside for a moment, it's also true to say that some ships can reach speeds that clearly were not intended. CCP's official stance is that changes to speed mods may be in the works to resolve what they are recognising as an imbalance. At this point, I believe nobody can realistically argue that the maximum obtainable speed of ships like the Ishtar and the Dominix are intended. While all of the equipment and implants required to create an effective nano-fit ship is extremely expensive, It has long been established that there should not be a price for invulnerability, that a player should not be able to buy his way into being invulnerable no matter how much it costs him.
A solution:
Potential solutions have been thrown around on the forums for a long time and it's clear that CCP are leaning toward making balance changes to rigs and modules with the goal of reducing speed in general. What's not clear is whether this will address the two actual problems defined above. In my opinion, any solution to the nano-fit issue must introduce a viable counter-maneuver or counter-tactic and must solve both the web problem and the speed issue. One potential solution could be to introduce long range webs with reduced strength and to introduce an optional agility script for webs. The script would increase the enemy's agility significantly, making him slow down a lot faster.

This would allow normal ships to web a nano ship effectively at the same range that the nano ships can use their warp disruptors. The nano ship would slow down much faster but because of the reduced strength of long range webs, several of them would be required to actually stop the nano ship before they could escape. This solution doesn't render the nano-fit worthless but provides a possible counter-maneuver in the form of using multiple long-range webifiers with agility scripts. The speed issue would have to be solved with separate balance changes with a goal of reducing the effect of speed modules on larger ships without affecting frigates and interceptors.
It's clear that CCP wants the nano craze to come to an end. I'm very interested in seeing how exactly they'll achieve that goal and how players will adapt to the changes. With my many years of experience in EVE, I can comfortably say that the players will come up with another flavour of the month setup. The great "flavour of the month nerf" play will start all over again with a new set of actors and we'll have something new to debate about on the forums.





Get a WordPress.com Blog











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Anon said on 5:34PM 5-12-2008
I love your concept of new technology (long range webs, etc.) being introduced to counter the issue. It will do more for long term balance than nerfing existing equipment and also fits the theme of the EVE universe much more closely. Using such a plan might also allow developers to mitigate a lot of the disenfranchisement that comes along with being stripped of power. I wish all MMOs would consider this their first option.
Reply
WindhamG said on 9:51PM 5-12-2008
Maybe a webifier version of the interdictor bubble? but like probes make them not deployable within range of the other.
Reply
side said on 11:10PM 5-12-2008
the ishtar is not a heavy tanker i mean 5 low slots for a tank what type of tank is viable with that.
even the demios isnt considered a tanking ship mainly using passive setup and try and outdamage the target befor you go down. Now the demios has 6 slots for a tank.
the ishtar is in noway a heavy tankable ship. What it is though is its versitile with the mid slots and the 2 high slots not dedicated turrets slots.
Also ur example of using those implants cost asmuch as 10 battleships so its inline with risk vs reward ratio just fine to me. If anything should be done is a adition of a Ewar rig or something to affect webbing range.
most people that complain about nanos r getting ganked bye a outnumbering force and at that point it doesnt matter what the enemy is in ur still gonna die so stop complaining because u dont wanna spend some money and time trying to learn how to fly a nano ship.
Reply
Brendan Drain said on 12:34PM 5-13-2008
Actually, I think you'll find that the Ishtar and Deimos can tank about as much damage as a tier 1 battleship. The Ishtar's 5 mids lets it run enough cap gear to sustain a dual medium repairer setup. In fact, I used to use it to tank over 1500 DPS from thermal and kinetic when I did Gallente COSMOS missions.
When it comes to PvP, it's another story. The issue with the Ishtar's tank in PvP is that with only 5 low slots and not much powergrid, it doesn't really have room for a plate. In PvP, an armour tank without enough hitpoints will crumble very quickly under heavy fire without giving any time to react.
Typical effective gang pvp setups for the ishtar do (and should) involve alternatives to standard tanking such as mwding out of range of the enemy once you've dropped your drones on them. The problem with the current nano ishtar isn't that it can drop drones on you and fly away, it's that it can't be caught by conventional means. Rapiers, huginns and interceptors can't do much to stop a nano ishtar if the pilot's rigged and has a head full of expensive implants.
Without a snake set, the nano ship of choice is the Vagabond or Stabber, of course. A well setup Vagabond can reach speeds close to or in excess of interceptor speeds without using any of the more expensive implants and gear. Can you honestly say to me that training for a vagabond should make you effectively invulnerable?
And to address your last point, not only should people not be forced to use nano setups but a good nano fit isn't even a viable counter to another good nano fit. Two nano-fit vagabonds will whizz around warp disrupting each other and missing each other with turrets for a while before one decides he's bored, mwds out of warp disruptor range and warps off.
Everyone has an opinion on the issue and this is mine. Some people love nano ships, some people hate them, but EVERYONE has an opinion on it :D.
J. said on 8:13AM 5-13-2008
I'm unclear why EvE and other MMOs don't try to factor in the size/weight of the ship in question when considering speed and speed buffs. For instance, in PotBS, I was jumped by two large ships of the line - level 50 players using galleons with 48 guns each - while I was in a medium but sturdy ship (level 24). When I was engaged, there was a good 600 yards between us, and I thought, no problem, I have the wind behind me, I can out sail this guy.
Imagine my surprise when his galleon lept forward and suddenly was running along side me. Two broadsides later and I was sunk. This in no way should have been the case, mirroring real-life physics (allow me to gripe here). Similarly, in EvE and other space battle sims, one might expect a cruiser or battleship to have such mass that it would require a good deal of power to change trajectory.
This is not to say that MMOs should kill themselves over physics calculations, but certainly there is justification to "nerf" the big ships and allow the intent of the game (small fast ships and big slow ships) to prevail.
Reply
side said on 12:02AM 5-14-2008
actualy the physics in eve work fairly well big heavy ships running a micro warp drive which raise your mass makes it harder to turn.
W. Graves said on 9:08AM 5-13-2008
@ side
Not everyone wants to fly a nano ship, once that becomes a requirement for successful PvP the there IS an imbalance that needs to be addressed.
Reply
Brendan Drain said on 12:19PM 5-13-2008
Exactly :).
Allowing one ship or setup to be better than most others means people will gravitate toward using it. That sets the barrier to successful PvP very high for a lot of players, the equivalent of saying "Just train for a Vagabond".
Ophion said on 2:18PM 5-13-2008
Nano ships aren't required for successful pvp. If you say "Just train 20m pvp sp, buy the best ship, the best rigs, and the best implants..." you're setting the bar for "success" pretty high, regardless of what the 'OP' FOTM is that you recommend. Well-fit nano gangs represent billions of ISK, of course they can be annoying.
A short article on viable counter-tactics:
http://www.eve-tribune.com/index.php?no=3_9&page=1
All that said, I do agree that speed should be brought back into line -- speed tanking should be a viable option for vagabonds and a few others, but it shouldn't dwarf armor and shields in effectiveness to the point where every ship fit is a question of "how fast can i go?" I feel that rigs are really what pushed this craze over the top, and it'll be interesting to see how CCP addresses the issue.
Reply
Sam Oakley said on 7:22AM 5-19-2008
I've actually seen a valid counter measure to nano ships work. It was a gang of rapiers and a couple of dps ships. They kept about 30 km apart from each other and staggered the webs, so that as the nano vagas coasted out of one web range, it was into another.
I agree though, there is no way a HAC should be able to outpace your average inty - it makes being a beginner impossible. The first thing you are ever any use at in propper pvp is as a tackler. These nano gangs make beginner PVP start at a much higher SP level and ruin the game for newer players.
Reply
Brendan Drain said on 7:25AM 5-19-2008
That is genius! But you have to agree that it's an incredibly convoluted and difficult-to-execute way to stop a vagabond. You shouldn't need rapiers spaced 30km apart along the length of a vagabond's trajectory to stop it, should you?
DFG said on 11:55PM 7-27-2008
Large ships represent the greatest leap in technology known to the EVE universe and any aliens receiving our radio waves. Kidding on the last part but seriously these ships are impossible.
They speed up, slow down, change trajectory, and break down too easily.
What modules for large ships could be is larger, so as to require a larger ship to hold; and a larger ship requires a larger module to perform the functions that the larger ship requires. As you can see, current modules that give a full bonus to a large ship are a few lightyears jump in technology. So tiny modules, as compared to the size of the ship being described here, should have a diminished effect. That, or add a ton of new large-ship modules to the already-bloated list of modules.
In return for your tons of money put into a larger ship you get more HP, less agility yet better passive abilities and resistances, to withstand multiple opponents.
Reply