Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
sutty
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 07:25:00 -
[151]
CCP need to address a few things first.
If people cant sit at safe spots while they are massively outnumbered it means they will need more numbers to fight.
So in general attacking forces will always bring more numbers. CCP need to make it so there is NO lag in large battles or they will screw everything.
|
sutty
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 07:25:00 -
[152]
CCP need to address a few things first.
If people cant sit at safe spots while they are massively outnumbered it means they will need more numbers to fight.
So in general attacking forces will always bring more numbers. CCP need to make it so there is NO lag in large battles or they will screw everything.
|
Malv
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 07:46:00 -
[153]
Edited by: Malv on 17/09/2004 07:55:59 Edited by: Malv on 17/09/2004 07:54:26
Originally by: Lurk
Originally by: Malv yay. engaging people is already is unncessary hard as it is. Combat should be encouraged as its one of the funner aspects of this game. Scanners encourage combat.
Scanners don't encourage combat, they encourage ganking.
Removing ppl in space and ppl in local would encourage combat ...
Unless you think combat needs to be completely consentual in every aspect I don't get your point. You won't get ganked in .5+, you might get ganked if in .4 or below, and if you have 4 other BSs next to you, I can assure you you wont get easily ganked.
Combat is not supposed to be initiated with consent from both parties. if that were the case we would never see any action, which is sorta the way it is now. I am tired of run-and-hide, insta blockade-busting, and other sorts of tactics that completely make pvp pointless. Yes, the group with more players have the edge in player count. Do you think it is easy getting a group of player together working towards a common goal? The only reason people are complaining is cause they want to have all the advantages that team-players have. It's not going to happen.
All the devs are doing is spicing up combat a bit by allowing players to be ambushed much easier. I see nothing wrong with it. Ambushing players is already near impossible. Once again I must iterate, if players have a chance to assess the situation and leave we would never see any combat.
|
Malv
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 07:46:00 -
[154]
Edited by: Malv on 17/09/2004 07:55:59 Edited by: Malv on 17/09/2004 07:54:26
Originally by: Lurk
Originally by: Malv yay. engaging people is already is unncessary hard as it is. Combat should be encouraged as its one of the funner aspects of this game. Scanners encourage combat.
Scanners don't encourage combat, they encourage ganking.
Removing ppl in space and ppl in local would encourage combat ...
Unless you think combat needs to be completely consentual in every aspect I don't get your point. You won't get ganked in .5+, you might get ganked if in .4 or below, and if you have 4 other BSs next to you, I can assure you you wont get easily ganked.
Combat is not supposed to be initiated with consent from both parties. if that were the case we would never see any action, which is sorta the way it is now. I am tired of run-and-hide, insta blockade-busting, and other sorts of tactics that completely make pvp pointless. Yes, the group with more players have the edge in player count. Do you think it is easy getting a group of player together working towards a common goal? The only reason people are complaining is cause they want to have all the advantages that team-players have. It's not going to happen.
All the devs are doing is spicing up combat a bit by allowing players to be ambushed much easier. I see nothing wrong with it. Ambushing players is already near impossible. Once again I must iterate, if players have a chance to assess the situation and leave we would never see any combat.
|
Gerome Doutrande
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 08:36:00 -
[155]
yay to system scanning.
Originally by: Jericho Ronin
1. Retreat is a valid part of any combat op. This eliminates that.
retreat yes. instantly going to a safe place within enemy territory which takes several hundred times as long to find as it takes to "make" em is not in my opinion.
Originally by: Jericho Ronin
2. Hit and runs are also valid forms of combat. Again this eliminates this.
hit and run yes. how about you use a) a fast ship to escape people that chase you and/or really run (from safespot to safespot for example), or b) hide by using a certain *cough cloak cough* module available for that purpose? ships should have to be equipped to hit and run in my opinion. with safespots you can use your tank a.k.a. battleship for hit and run.
Originally by: Jericho Ronin
3. Hiding from superior numbers while waiting to be reinforced or until they get bored and leave is another valid form of combat. This eliminates this.
same as for 2nd point.
Originally by: Jericho Ronin
4. Secretly staging and amassing forces for an op is a valid form of combat. This eliminates that.
this has much more to do with map and local than with safespots i think.
i also think that log off/on tactics will become much more "popular" with this though, that may have to be addressed further together with the introduction of system scanning.
|
Gerome Doutrande
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 08:36:00 -
[156]
yay to system scanning.
Originally by: Jericho Ronin
1. Retreat is a valid part of any combat op. This eliminates that.
retreat yes. instantly going to a safe place within enemy territory which takes several hundred times as long to find as it takes to "make" em is not in my opinion.
Originally by: Jericho Ronin
2. Hit and runs are also valid forms of combat. Again this eliminates this.
hit and run yes. how about you use a) a fast ship to escape people that chase you and/or really run (from safespot to safespot for example), or b) hide by using a certain *cough cloak cough* module available for that purpose? ships should have to be equipped to hit and run in my opinion. with safespots you can use your tank a.k.a. battleship for hit and run.
Originally by: Jericho Ronin
3. Hiding from superior numbers while waiting to be reinforced or until they get bored and leave is another valid form of combat. This eliminates this.
same as for 2nd point.
Originally by: Jericho Ronin
4. Secretly staging and amassing forces for an op is a valid form of combat. This eliminates that.
this has much more to do with map and local than with safespots i think.
i also think that log off/on tactics will become much more "popular" with this though, that may have to be addressed further together with the introduction of system scanning.
|
Aelius
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 08:49:00 -
[157]
I say YES \o/ Selling Raven BPC ME20 3M at Yulai 1st Station |
Aelius
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 08:49:00 -
[158]
I say YES \o/ Selling Raven BPC ME20 3M at Yulai 1st Station |
Acab
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 09:12:00 -
[159]
Originally by: Wild Rho Assuming that this system scanner basically turns finding safe spots into a simple point and lick operation then personally speaking this has me worried for several reasons.
Pvp is now going to become a pure count the number of battleships game in the end. If a larger fleet arrives the all it takes is a few clicks and it's an easy gank for them, so now the small guerilla raids are gone in favour of whoever can make the biggest fleet. This is basicalyl going to screw any small corp trying to get it's first steps into the big bad 0.0 space (and NO I don't think that they should HAVE to join some alliance to operate in 0.0) as well as freelancers.
As stated before, this is going to increase the number of mid warp logouts and similar that will occur by some unfortunate pilots that get caught in a log in trap with no where to run and soon, no where to hide.
I know quite a few people who make small careers for themselves tracking down safe spots for other people/corps, for themselves etc and had turned it into an art form that others were willing to pay a reasonable price for, or they located for themselves a nice stash of battleships some kind souls had left at an ss (presumably for some minning op). In a single stroke this has wiped out an entire player generated career forcing them to become take one of the more typical careers that anyone can do (miner, fighter, hauler, whatever).
CCP seem to be wiping out any chance for people to carve out unique roles for themselves by turning them into simple operataions that any player with a single brain cell can do. Eve is fast running out of means for players to use their own actual skills, patience etc to their advantage by having the devs automate so many of these functions and persaonlly it has me very worried.
Amen.
From what i seem to recal though it may require some special skills and it could be done only with a certain kind of ship (black or covert ops).
Acab |
Acab
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 09:12:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Wild Rho Assuming that this system scanner basically turns finding safe spots into a simple point and lick operation then personally speaking this has me worried for several reasons.
Pvp is now going to become a pure count the number of battleships game in the end. If a larger fleet arrives the all it takes is a few clicks and it's an easy gank for them, so now the small guerilla raids are gone in favour of whoever can make the biggest fleet. This is basicalyl going to screw any small corp trying to get it's first steps into the big bad 0.0 space (and NO I don't think that they should HAVE to join some alliance to operate in 0.0) as well as freelancers.
As stated before, this is going to increase the number of mid warp logouts and similar that will occur by some unfortunate pilots that get caught in a log in trap with no where to run and soon, no where to hide.
I know quite a few people who make small careers for themselves tracking down safe spots for other people/corps, for themselves etc and had turned it into an art form that others were willing to pay a reasonable price for, or they located for themselves a nice stash of battleships some kind souls had left at an ss (presumably for some minning op). In a single stroke this has wiped out an entire player generated career forcing them to become take one of the more typical careers that anyone can do (miner, fighter, hauler, whatever).
CCP seem to be wiping out any chance for people to carve out unique roles for themselves by turning them into simple operataions that any player with a single brain cell can do. Eve is fast running out of means for players to use their own actual skills, patience etc to their advantage by having the devs automate so many of these functions and persaonlly it has me very worried.
Amen.
From what i seem to recal though it may require some special skills and it could be done only with a certain kind of ship (black or covert ops).
Acab |
|
Romsla
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 10:20:00 -
[161]
Edited by: Romsla on 17/09/2004 13:10:24 http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=109981&page=1 Wee :) |
Romsla
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 10:20:00 -
[162]
Edited by: Romsla on 17/09/2004 13:10:24 http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=109981&page=1 Wee :) |
Romsla
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 10:23:00 -
[163]
Edited by: Romsla on 17/09/2004 13:10:11 http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=109981&page=1 Wee :) |
Romsla
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 10:23:00 -
[164]
Edited by: Romsla on 17/09/2004 13:10:11 http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=109981&page=1 Wee :) |
Romsla
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 10:41:00 -
[165]
Edited by: Romsla on 17/09/2004 13:13:54 Sorry for triple-post :) There were megacubes of text here, i moved everything to http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=109981&page=1
:-) Anyways the most realistic-to-quickly-implement statements: 1.Signature resolution stats of ships must be in. 2a.Overal radius of and types objects must be in. 2b.Partial scan, where you scan a cone of 5-15-30-60... degrees must be in. :) (1+2=You must select the scan resolution and area to scan. The higher the resolution and the higher the range, the more cap and time you will need. ) 3.Different types of sensors good for different density and types of space particles in the system. (Very easy to do i think, since there are star\system types already present) - optionally, but cool. 4.In Real Life , the more the range, the more power you need... So system scanning for longer ranges must eat more capacitor. That absolutley means its a high-power slot. More slots = more power. Must be in, its obious. 5a.Also you will have to wait some time before you get sensor waves coming back to you . So lets say waves travel 3Aus per minute ? Slow. Ok let them travel instantly, but you will need to power the CPU's that are receiving data from "pongs" and wait. Optional. 5b.Maybe its a good idea so that players can dedicate their ships CPU to sensor pong decoders. But the more cpu, the faster, the more cap you need. Optional. (4+5 = the balance of time/cap needed and what you get out of scanning may require a lot of thought and balancing-out to actually implement) 6.Ofcourse the scanning ship must be far away from any interference ,including of its own systems... with the engines and all other systems cut down! Must be in, if we need to implement warfare. 7.Maybe different coatings for ships to prevent\enchance scans. Fully optional. :)
More rabuf stuff if you click the link. Wee :) |
Romsla
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 10:41:00 -
[166]
Edited by: Romsla on 17/09/2004 13:13:54 Sorry for triple-post :) There were megacubes of text here, i moved everything to http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=109981&page=1
:-) Anyways the most realistic-to-quickly-implement statements: 1.Signature resolution stats of ships must be in. 2a.Overal radius of and types objects must be in. 2b.Partial scan, where you scan a cone of 5-15-30-60... degrees must be in. :) (1+2=You must select the scan resolution and area to scan. The higher the resolution and the higher the range, the more cap and time you will need. ) 3.Different types of sensors good for different density and types of space particles in the system. (Very easy to do i think, since there are star\system types already present) - optionally, but cool. 4.In Real Life , the more the range, the more power you need... So system scanning for longer ranges must eat more capacitor. That absolutley means its a high-power slot. More slots = more power. Must be in, its obious. 5a.Also you will have to wait some time before you get sensor waves coming back to you . So lets say waves travel 3Aus per minute ? Slow. Ok let them travel instantly, but you will need to power the CPU's that are receiving data from "pongs" and wait. Optional. 5b.Maybe its a good idea so that players can dedicate their ships CPU to sensor pong decoders. But the more cpu, the faster, the more cap you need. Optional. (4+5 = the balance of time/cap needed and what you get out of scanning may require a lot of thought and balancing-out to actually implement) 6.Ofcourse the scanning ship must be far away from any interference ,including of its own systems... with the engines and all other systems cut down! Must be in, if we need to implement warfare. 7.Maybe different coatings for ships to prevent\enchance scans. Fully optional. :)
More rabuf stuff if you click the link. Wee :) |
DJTheBaron
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 10:42:00 -
[167]
we will have to wait until its impliments in the shiva public trial before we judge it, but if it works reasonably well and requires some character and player skill it should be fine
it simply means you have to defend your 0.0 operations or fit so you can run a few jumps to a station if nessary __________________________________________________
Scum, your all scum. |
DJTheBaron
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 10:42:00 -
[168]
we will have to wait until its impliments in the shiva public trial before we judge it, but if it works reasonably well and requires some character and player skill it should be fine
it simply means you have to defend your 0.0 operations or fit so you can run a few jumps to a station if nessary __________________________________________________
Scum, your all scum. |
Panzer Faust
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 11:59:00 -
[169]
Edited by: Panzer Faust on 17/09/2004 12:01:29 I really hope they will delete the "show ppl in space"option if not totally locals from 0,0 when they implement that scanning change. that way ppl who choose to hunt in retired 0,0 systems will still be able to do it without being tracked down by a 15+ships fleet who will spot u on the map, find ur safespot and wtfpwn ur a$$. If safespot finding is going to become easier, we absolutely NEED to remove these map options which gives up way too many informations about 0,0 imho. As a consequence we would see many more scouts in 0,0 exploring systems to find targets for the main fleet. many many options from the map should not be available to 0,0 space, hopefully we'll see these features deleted in shiva, when it comes for testing soon on test server --- Proud Owner of a Navy Issue Raven. |
Panzer Faust
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 11:59:00 -
[170]
Edited by: Panzer Faust on 17/09/2004 12:01:29 I really hope they will delete the "show ppl in space"option if not totally locals from 0,0 when they implement that scanning change. that way ppl who choose to hunt in retired 0,0 systems will still be able to do it without being tracked down by a 15+ships fleet who will spot u on the map, find ur safespot and wtfpwn ur a$$. If safespot finding is going to become easier, we absolutely NEED to remove these map options which gives up way too many informations about 0,0 imho. As a consequence we would see many more scouts in 0,0 exploring systems to find targets for the main fleet. many many options from the map should not be available to 0,0 space, hopefully we'll see these features deleted in shiva, when it comes for testing soon on test server --- Proud Owner of a Navy Issue Raven. |
|
QuantumX
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 13:44:00 -
[171]
Originally by: Shamis Orzoz Edited by: Shamis Orzoz on 16/09/2004 18:18:06 I will be very upset if they remove the real life skill required to find safespots since this is my major source of income.
As I've said before, in my opinion the only thing required is to fix the buggy, laggy, generally crappy nature of scanning. If I didn't have to wait for scanner lag, or get misdirected by a wacked out directional scan, I'd find safespots a lot faster.
However, I wouldn't be opposed to a few abilities/modules/skils that make things easier. I have two ideas regarding this: 1. Add a skill which increases your scan range. 5-10%increase in max scan range per level.
2. Add a module that can be fitted to any ship, but will require a new skill just to fit, sort of like the covert ops cloaking devices. This module should cause shield and/or capacitor decrease on the ship so that its not such a great idea for a PvP'er to fit one. This module should allow the player to warp directly to a safespot IF they are within 1 au of the ship AND have it on the directional scanner at 5 degrees.
Shamis
Spot on....
Called me old fasion, but if they fixed the scanner, added a few more options, it would be fine.
Fix whats broken rather then make drastic changes to gameply to ie the fact that something is broken.
Scanner need lots of dev love, to make it useful, and maybe even a few scanner modules and skills. But the basic skills of having to use a scanner and know how to use it are the real key.
If i wanted point and click simplicity i'd play frogger. |
QuantumX
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 13:44:00 -
[172]
Originally by: Shamis Orzoz Edited by: Shamis Orzoz on 16/09/2004 18:18:06 I will be very upset if they remove the real life skill required to find safespots since this is my major source of income.
As I've said before, in my opinion the only thing required is to fix the buggy, laggy, generally crappy nature of scanning. If I didn't have to wait for scanner lag, or get misdirected by a wacked out directional scan, I'd find safespots a lot faster.
However, I wouldn't be opposed to a few abilities/modules/skils that make things easier. I have two ideas regarding this: 1. Add a skill which increases your scan range. 5-10%increase in max scan range per level.
2. Add a module that can be fitted to any ship, but will require a new skill just to fit, sort of like the covert ops cloaking devices. This module should cause shield and/or capacitor decrease on the ship so that its not such a great idea for a PvP'er to fit one. This module should allow the player to warp directly to a safespot IF they are within 1 au of the ship AND have it on the directional scanner at 5 degrees.
Shamis
Spot on....
Called me old fasion, but if they fixed the scanner, added a few more options, it would be fine.
Fix whats broken rather then make drastic changes to gameply to ie the fact that something is broken.
Scanner need lots of dev love, to make it useful, and maybe even a few scanner modules and skills. But the basic skills of having to use a scanner and know how to use it are the real key.
If i wanted point and click simplicity i'd play frogger. |
mafish
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 14:02:00 -
[173]
i must say i really hate the idea that any ship would be able to just warp to another it would ruin the game imo. also what about agent missions/runners they get sent to a low sec system start there agent mission then bam 3 pc rats warp in on them i love killing people but this would be totally unfair on that profession.
|
mafish
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 14:02:00 -
[174]
i must say i really hate the idea that any ship would be able to just warp to another it would ruin the game imo. also what about agent missions/runners they get sent to a low sec system start there agent mission then bam 3 pc rats warp in on them i love killing people but this would be totally unfair on that profession.
|
Xavier Arron
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 19:22:00 -
[175]
Originally by: Julien Derida Digi's post is on the money. It would be very sad to see player skill removed from safespot location. It's one of the few things in Eve that requires actually you to think in 3d. Do we really want everything to be point and click?
Agreed, Digi's post is on the money. Perhaps an improvement to the scanner interface is also needed. Sometype of 3D compass with degrees on, and rotation handles (like in Maya) so you can more accurately rotate your ship.
|
Xavier Arron
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 19:22:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Julien Derida Digi's post is on the money. It would be very sad to see player skill removed from safespot location. It's one of the few things in Eve that requires actually you to think in 3d. Do we really want everything to be point and click?
Agreed, Digi's post is on the money. Perhaps an improvement to the scanner interface is also needed. Sometype of 3D compass with degrees on, and rotation handles (like in Maya) so you can more accurately rotate your ship.
|
Grim Vandal
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 23:44:00 -
[177]
while I honestly think that system scanning should involve RL skills I fear that excatly this would limit it.
It will be easy to find the noob and it will be easy to find the dumb miners however it will be more difficult to find some pvper while it will be impossible to find hardcore pvps.
I mean what does it take to make a safespot out of a safespot?? a few secs while you will never be fast enough to find someone with RL skills involved.
Now we need to keep in mind that logging off should by no way be a valid tactic if someone trys to find you. Now the devs consider a 5 min timer which will reactivate if the ship recives any sort of agression. So actually system scanning has to be faster than 5 mins ... and sadly there is not much room for RL skills in those 5 mins ...
so now to some ideas:
IMO only BO-frigs should be able to fit that special system scanning module. eg. it has those 5000 cpu while the BO frig gets -90% to the cpu usage for this module ON THE OTHER HAND it should NOT be able to fit a cloaking device ever on it. eg. +1000% cpu for cloaking devices
similar thing has to happen to the CO frig which should not be able to fit the "system scanning module" therefor +1000% to the "system scanning module".
Next thing: Give the BO frig the ability to either warp to the target which would be inaccurate to some degree or the ability to make a BM out of the tactical view. (plz DO NOT make it right click add BM!!!) With inaccurate I mean you would land somewhere between 300 to 500 km. However the system scanning module should also have a 2 mins cycle to prevent the BO frig to be able to warp to the target again if it lands eg. 400 km from it.
Now to the BM making part which would involve the "RL skill". It would be made through eg. the tactical view in which case you would see the enemy fleet as some dot but you would be able to make a BM whereever you want. BUT ONLY the CO frig would be able to warp to that BM!!!!(very importnat) now the difficult part in it is, first that you could make a really close BM to your enemy BUT on the other hand only the CO frig will be able to warp to it so you better dont make it toooo close since your CO frig would decloak and get ganked.
so you see the BO frig is able to do the job while it would be far more efficient if it was used in cooperation with a CO frig.
sorry atm I cant think of anything else which would invovle more RL skills but on the other hand prevent people from logging off.
sadly you wont be able to find "safespots" of some unboarded ships anymore since noone will be dumb enough to leave their unboarded ships in space while he knows that its pretty easy to find them within a few mins.
btw I would even consider to screw system BM since they would screw up the whole thing. if eg. a pod warps to a system bm it will be safe since not a single other ship is able to warp over 3000 au in a single warp.
So to sum it up again only the BO frig with its "system scanning module" will be able to make BM which would then only be useable by CO frigs but it could also choose to warp to the location by itself which would be inaccurate to some degree. The BM making part would invovle the player skills. So the BO frig pilot has to be a very good one since it will be easy to find it (no cloak) and it will be easy to gank it since it has rather crappy stats compareable to a CO frig. So you see you already need some good experience as well as some good ingame skills to fly that little sucker.
Greetings Grim |
Grim Vandal
|
Posted - 2004.09.17 23:44:00 -
[178]
while I honestly think that system scanning should involve RL skills I fear that excatly this would limit it.
It will be easy to find the noob and it will be easy to find the dumb miners however it will be more difficult to find some pvper while it will be impossible to find hardcore pvps.
I mean what does it take to make a safespot out of a safespot?? a few secs while you will never be fast enough to find someone with RL skills involved.
Now we need to keep in mind that logging off should by no way be a valid tactic if someone trys to find you. Now the devs consider a 5 min timer which will reactivate if the ship recives any sort of agression. So actually system scanning has to be faster than 5 mins ... and sadly there is not much room for RL skills in those 5 mins ...
so now to some ideas:
IMO only BO-frigs should be able to fit that special system scanning module. eg. it has those 5000 cpu while the BO frig gets -90% to the cpu usage for this module ON THE OTHER HAND it should NOT be able to fit a cloaking device ever on it. eg. +1000% cpu for cloaking devices
similar thing has to happen to the CO frig which should not be able to fit the "system scanning module" therefor +1000% to the "system scanning module".
Next thing: Give the BO frig the ability to either warp to the target which would be inaccurate to some degree or the ability to make a BM out of the tactical view. (plz DO NOT make it right click add BM!!!) With inaccurate I mean you would land somewhere between 300 to 500 km. However the system scanning module should also have a 2 mins cycle to prevent the BO frig to be able to warp to the target again if it lands eg. 400 km from it.
Now to the BM making part which would involve the "RL skill". It would be made through eg. the tactical view in which case you would see the enemy fleet as some dot but you would be able to make a BM whereever you want. BUT ONLY the CO frig would be able to warp to that BM!!!!(very importnat) now the difficult part in it is, first that you could make a really close BM to your enemy BUT on the other hand only the CO frig will be able to warp to it so you better dont make it toooo close since your CO frig would decloak and get ganked.
so you see the BO frig is able to do the job while it would be far more efficient if it was used in cooperation with a CO frig.
sorry atm I cant think of anything else which would invovle more RL skills but on the other hand prevent people from logging off.
sadly you wont be able to find "safespots" of some unboarded ships anymore since noone will be dumb enough to leave their unboarded ships in space while he knows that its pretty easy to find them within a few mins.
btw I would even consider to screw system BM since they would screw up the whole thing. if eg. a pod warps to a system bm it will be safe since not a single other ship is able to warp over 3000 au in a single warp.
So to sum it up again only the BO frig with its "system scanning module" will be able to make BM which would then only be useable by CO frigs but it could also choose to warp to the location by itself which would be inaccurate to some degree. The BM making part would invovle the player skills. So the BO frig pilot has to be a very good one since it will be easy to find it (no cloak) and it will be easy to gank it since it has rather crappy stats compareable to a CO frig. So you see you already need some good experience as well as some good ingame skills to fly that little sucker.
Greetings Grim |
sokken
|
Posted - 2004.09.18 01:00:00 -
[179]
Please keep the current level of player skill needed to find safes.. dumbing things down is not a good thing. -
|
sokken
|
Posted - 2004.09.18 01:00:00 -
[180]
Please keep the current level of player skill needed to find safes.. dumbing things down is not a good thing. -
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |