Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
1. Sticky:[March] Rorqual and Mining changes - in Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center [original thread]
Cade Windstalker wrote: The closest I've come is pointing out that Excavator Drones are unlikely to stay at current prices so the asset on the field is likely to be worth less, which helps the time to pay back the initial investment. I haven...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2017.03.11 06:14:09
|
2. Citadels - Solution To The Paradox - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Lich Reaper wrote: w1ndstrike wrote: Lich Reaper wrote: IGÇÖve thought a lot about asset safety, and the only thing I could come up with, other than making everything drop like in WH space, is that from the moment your citadel is being S...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2017.02.02 01:47:44
|
3. Citadels - Solution To The Paradox - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Lich Reaper wrote: IGÇÖve thought a lot about asset safety, and the only thing I could come up with, other than making everything drop like in WH space, is that from the moment your citadel is being SHOT, you cannot asset safety until it is de...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2017.02.02 01:23:13
|
4. CODE. Welcome to Ascension Event! - in In-Game Events and Gatherings [original thread]
the funny thing is I think #2 through #7 are good fun and I'll be trying for a couple of them, but item #1 is exactly the kind of thing that CCP has in the past taken action against (and not just in newbie systems). I'd suggest dropping #1 and ju...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2016.11.15 20:27:31
|
5. CODE. Welcome to Ascension Event! - in In-Game Events and Gatherings [original thread]
#1 is asking to cop a ban, just saying. CCP doesn't have many lines, but ******* with their real-world bottom line in meaningful ways is one of the best ways to get them to act.
- by w1ndstrike - at 2016.11.15 05:54:33
|
6. sisi is offline - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Status Unknown here too, launcher side bug or is the server currently down
- by w1ndstrike - at 2016.10.29 14:24:43
|
7. Looking for a Definitive answer on Docking in for Eng Complex - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
let me add to your headache: CCP intends the as yet unreleased drilling platform structures to actually be the repreocessing bonused ones, so by design you would have to move the material from a drilling platform to your engineering complex anyhow
- by w1ndstrike - at 2016.10.29 06:08:43
|
8. Sticky:[Citadels] Capital Q&A - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Unless you change the binary and chance-based nature of ECM, ewar resistance won't mean a thing, as a single griffin can jam a super even if its not consistent. I sincerely hope you're planning to give ECM a pass and simply change it to reducing ...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.11.13 18:22:40
|
9. Sticky:[Carnyx] The Jackdaw - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Nikolai Agnon wrote: Confessor: + Damage (10%/level) + Reduction in activation cost (10%/level) (matches the Coercer 10%-per-level) Svipul: + Damage (10%/level) + Range (10%/level) (at level 5, matches the Thrasher passive 50%) Jackdaw: + ROF...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.05.19 04:03:44
|
10. Sticky:[New structures] Item safety mechanics on structure destruction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Pine Marten wrote: It is horrible to see all the risk aversion going on in this thread. Lets take a lesson from the Cold hars real life. If a station blows up, almost nothing is recoverable. lets say 15 % survives as loot, and the rest is just...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.05.18 21:23:24
|
11. EFT v2.13.4 - Incursion 1.4.1 - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Lux Nifertari wrote: Hello! Thanks for you job! Can you pls add some more parameters Firepower: "effective damage" - means amount of damage you can deal until next reload. Its important if you want to understand how good your fitting with rapi...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.04.27 18:35:13
|
12. Sticky:Dev blog: Ship Customization: Time to Show Some SKIN - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
I like the system, I think its a very healthy implementation for the game, and keeps "pay to win" firmly out of the picture while still providing CCP with a revenue stream. HOWEVER... your prices on these are nuts. literally stupid. Games like ...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.04.21 19:18:52
|
13. Sticky:[New structures] Item safety mechanics on structure destruction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Serendipity Lost wrote: I agree, CCP should give 8 months notice that things are changing. Feel free to conquer any stations containing stranded assets in the interim. I really don't want to hear that everyone will quit eve if station destruc...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.04.08 23:45:05
|
14. Sticky:[New structures] Item safety mechanics on structure destruction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Rowells wrote: SFM Hobb3s wrote: Let us also consider that Eve is about shooting spaceships and blowing up spaceships. Destructible stations that risk stored assets, station market stores or contracts, are going to have at least two CATASTRO...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.04.07 23:16:48
|
15. Sticky:[New structures] Item safety mechanics on structure destruction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Phig Neutron wrote: YOU see a difference between "outposts" and "stations" but I don't see any indication that the developers see "stations" as sacred and untouchable while they're re-designing "outposts". I'm pretty sure that whatever change...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.03.27 15:57:24
|
16. Sticky:[New structures] Item safety mechanics on structure destruction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Serendipity Lost wrote: As a wh gal I find this whole discussion of the safety of ones assets after you get your poop pushed in kind of amusing. I'm seeing a couple of 1000 eve players that really haven't embraced the core concept of loss that ...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.03.27 01:06:02
|
17. Sticky:[New structures] Item safety mechanics on structure destruction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Phig Neutron wrote: oohthey ioh wrote: Phig Neutron wrote: Sabriz Adoudel wrote: Why would people bring large amounts of wealth to a destructible station? Strikes me as a silly decision. They want to make all stations destructabl...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.03.26 22:11:42
|
18. Sticky:[New structures] Item safety mechanics on structure destruction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
MicroNova wrote: If you want your stuff to be 100% safe keep it in an NPC station. If you need some equipment for a deployment, then take what you are willing to risk. Never fly what you aren't willing to lose the second you undock. Loot is ...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.03.26 05:27:58
|
19. Sticky:[New structures] Item safety mechanics on structure destruction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
there are multiple serious problems with this, and as devs you need to realize that your current goals are mostly mutually exclusive. first of all, EvE is a game about risk, both taking calculated risks and mitigating those risks. a HUGE amount ...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.03.23 23:30:37
|
20. Sticky:Dev blog: Back Into the Structure - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
I think the biggest issue that will need to be addressed with these changes is how you handle the assets in outposts of players who are not currently subscribed. those of us who are subscribed will have some kind of heads up that its time to start...
- by w1ndstrike - at 2015.03.21 21:13:22
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |