Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 |
121. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Arrendis wrote: Sigras wrote: IMHO skirmish ships do not constitute "effective military control" of a grid if they constantly have to run away... For that reason I feel that the entosis link should disable propulsion mods the same way the HI...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.10 08:22:22
|
122. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Sibyyl wrote: Promiscuous Female wrote: interceptor sees combat probes, then disengages No. CCP Fozzie wrote: You can't cancel an entosis link until the end of the cycle. Source . Are you saying you can't kill an interceptor that can...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.10 06:39:01
|
123. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
My point is that trollceptors are going to shape the meta. Every defense fleet will have to be set up specifically to defend against them which is something they just said in the OP that they didnt want. The problem is they need to define "Milita...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.09 19:50:43
|
124. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Eli Apol wrote: Sigras wrote: To the people stating that trollceptors dont matter because you can counter them with a friendly entosis link... Picture this Scenario I have a fleet of 300 coming to capture your system after we reinforce...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.09 19:44:55
|
125. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
To the people stating that trollceptors dont matter because you can counter them with a friendly entosis link... Picture this Scenario I have a fleet of 300 coming to capture your system after we reinforced it last night, but I dont like Foz...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.09 19:25:52
|
126. Pheobe Phase 2 Suggestions for SOV and Super Caps - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
baltec1 wrote: Anoms need to be removed as the primary income source in null and replaced with something more like missions to allow for much larger populations in a system. If you want to allow for higher population density in each null sec...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.09 10:35:03
|
127. Wrecks and Salvage 2.0 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I agree, wrecks should not be destructible... What if for every 1000 damage they take, each item inside has a 1% chance of destruction.
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.08 01:55:01
|
128. "Prime Time" Alternatives - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Nariya Kentaya wrote: honestly **** all of the changes, 90% of them in phase 2 are so poorly thought out i can only assume CCP's future vision of EVE is an arcadey space farmville shooter for 12 year olds to throw cash at to get bigger numbers ...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.08 01:51:40
|
129. With this much emphasis on smaller engagement, address targeting - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote: so discourage group play in an MMO? please learn the difference between "discouraging" and "balancing" That said, the problem with this idea is that people would game the system, as others have already stated. a fleet...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.08 01:41:16
|
130. An Unorthodox Fix to "Cruisers Online" - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
So the feeling I'm getting in this thread is that instead of promoting tactics that encourage fleets to split up into smaller units to move independently, most people would rather just orbit anchor and press F1? No diversity, no independent thoug...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.08 00:55:50
|
131. An Unorthodox Fix to "Cruisers Online" - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Reina Xyaer wrote: Sigras wrote: Ok, allow me to summarize so you can understand... nobody uses battleships because cruisers are 80% as good, are far more mobile, and arent vulnerable to bombers which means they still get to use the same bra...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.05 23:51:42
|
132. An Unorthodox Fix to "Cruisers Online" - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Reina Xyaer wrote: Hairpins Blueprint wrote: baltec1 wrote: Nerf logi. Ohh you Megatron blob loving person. Logi is ok, it's much more fun when reps are holding :) in small/med sized gangs. Than just die in few seconds. Yes, Logi ...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.05 21:21:01
|
133. Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Logan Revelore wrote: Another note. This whole proposed system smells and reeks of artifical systems for the sole reason of "game design", with few ties to lore or any ingame sensibilities. Implementing some abstract dominion based gameplay '...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.04 21:36:04
|
134. Proposal for 'multi-barrelled' turrets (based on Dual 250mm ... - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
There are a few problems with the reload time approach ... namely laser turrets...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.04 20:07:10
|
135. Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
My question is what happens if I ninja a new TCU into place after I lose the first one? If i'm faster on the draw than anyone else do i get my system back?
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.04 19:14:43
|
136. Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Talbrys Narentyr wrote: All they're doing is making it even more aids to take a system, and practically impossible to do anything outside of your own TZ. All you need is a cloud of interceptors with the t2 (250km range one) loaded up with sebo...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.04 01:02:50
|
137. Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Cr Turist wrote: Gizznitt Malikite wrote: Brother Mercury wrote: This patch makes it nearly worthless (save for POS BASH) to log in supers or dreads. j .... FYI: Supers can use gates now. FYI: Part of the new Sov System requires being...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.04 01:00:44
|
138. Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
The only change I would make at first glance is expanding the "prime time" window to 8 hours. This would allow your alliance to pick US/EU, US/RUS or EU/RUS but not be required to cover all 3.
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.03 23:19:14
|
139. Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Cheyennes wrote: MiliasColds wrote: a note for out of timezone players (from declared prime time) you still raise indices which makes things easier to defend. you can still help with capture events that are ongoing past prime time. you can ...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.03 22:50:20
|
140. An Unorthodox Fix to "Cruisers Online" - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
M1k3y Koontz wrote: baltec1 wrote: Nerf logi. Yes pls. The answer to logi is more and better AOE... this proposal is the answer to logi Everyone sees bombs as an all or nothing tactic which I just dont get... Imaging a bombing run thr...
- by Sigras - at 2015.03.03 04:33:43
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |