Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
94
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 13:24:00 -
[391] - Quote
(This is all from the perspective of keeping w-space multi-player and not session changing to a single-player environment, ie: docking in a station. Note that this means space barbies won't be possible, much to the joy and relief of w-space denizens everywhere)
I personally like force fields (proximity based protection zones) because they offer an area of safety. I like this from the defensive perspective, obviously, but it also offers a non-direct advantage to the hunter as well. Some benefits have already been mentioned, and are good ones. I particularly like the ability for a fleet to gather semi-safely, have room to align together semi-safely, and then warp together. For defenders, it's obvious why. For hunters, it means the defenders can organize and might be just that little bit more willing to bring a fight.
The lack of a proximity-based protection zone means that as soon as you are no longer attached to the structure, you are vulnerable. If you can't move while attached, you have to detach yourself (become vulnerable, moving at 0 m/s) to even try to warp out. This makes it much more dangerous for the defenders, and will actually hurt chances for fights to happen in a hostile system.
Sieged victims will most certainly NOT try to warp out into your bubble traps on the exit wormholes if they can immediately be shot at the "ondock" point. C5/C6 may not see many POS sieges, but they happen all the time in C4 and lower; many of our targets are sieged corp members trying to evac, especially when another corp member is smugly "negotiating" for an end of the shooting. After the corpmate is podded, the negotiator usually calms down and boasts less.
If you eject from your ship that is moored, what happens? Does the ship automatically go into storage and your pod becomes safe? Does the ship stay moored, and your pod is now floating and vulnerable? What happens if you don't have an SMA? Can you even eject safely in that case? I would really, really love to hear why CCP wants to get rid of force fields instead of reworking the code to make it an elegant feature instead of a nasty hack.
If I gank a Drake running anoms, and their Noctis warps back to the POS from another anom, that salvager should feel safe enough to reship to a superior ship to mine so he can come at me and fall prey to my ambush without worrying about being shot while reshipping. The proximity based protection zone provides a temporary safe zone while near the POS, so the pilot feels emboldened for further combat. No force field immediately puts someone who was just attacked deeper into a feeling of vulnerability.
|
IgnasS
High Intellion Exhale.
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 14:36:00 -
[392] - Quote
What this thread really lacks in my opinion is a DEV response. I'm not saying that they should shower us with all the details of the upcoming POS changes/rewamp, but at least a single sentence from guys working on this CCP Greyscale, CCP Masterplan, CCP Ytterbium, CCP Soundwave, CCP Explorer & CCP Unifex would be really nice.
It should sound something like this - "Dear wormhole dwellers, rest assured we will do our best when designing new Starbase System, please keep posting your ideas and concerns. We are reading and considering a lot of possible options."
We can all see that Two Step is really reading this and replying extensively (doesn't matter if we agree with him or not) at least we can see that he's trying, +1 for him because of that.
EDIT : Ok, two sentences |
Madner Kami
Durendal Ascending Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
46
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 14:40:00 -
[393] - Quote
IgnasS wrote:What this thread really lacks in my opinion is a DEV response. I'm not saying that they should shower us with all the details of the upcoming POS changes/rewamp, but at least a single sentence from guys working on this CCP Greyscale, CCP Masterplan, CCP Ytterbium, CCP Soundwave, CCP Explorer & CCP Unifex would be really nice.
This would be very usefull.
IgnasS wrote:It should sound something like this - "Dear wormhole dwellers, rest assured we will do our best when designing new Starbase System, please keep posting your ideas and concerns. We are reading and considering a lot of possible options."
This, however, not at all. I don't want a gummy-damage-control-reply, I'd like actual substance. |
IgnasS
High Intellion Exhale.
5
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 14:47:00 -
[394] - Quote
Madner Kami wrote:IgnasS wrote:What this thread really lacks in my opinion is a DEV response. I'm not saying that they should shower us with all the details of the upcoming POS changes/rewamp, but at least a single sentence from guys working on this CCP Greyscale, CCP Masterplan, CCP Ytterbium, CCP Soundwave, CCP Explorer & CCP Unifex would be really nice. This would be very usefull. IgnasS wrote:It should sound something like this - "Dear wormhole dwellers, rest assured we will do our best when designing new Starbase System, please keep posting your ideas and concerns. We are reading and considering a lot of possible options." This, however, not at all. I don't want a gummy-damage-control-reply, I'd like actual substance.
I see your point, but for starters it would be nice, then it could develop in to broader convo with devs and maybe (just maybe) an early dev blog about it, not like 1 month before release on TQ, when only minor bits and pieces can be changed before release.
NEW VERSION OF THE DEV RESPONSE. It should sound something like this - "Dear wormhole dwellers, rest assured we will do our best when designing new Starbase System, please keep posting your ideas and concerns. We are reading this thread, considering a lot of possible options and will keep discussing with you the changes we would to implement." |
Archdaimon
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
85
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 15:40:00 -
[395] - Quote
You already wrote the pr version. Now they just need to post: Read!
Then understood
Then full compliance |
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc Elysian Empire
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 16:39:00 -
[396] - Quote
The team that will work on POSes is currently working on Crimewatch, which may not even be released by Winter. We're 3-6 months away from any serious thought on the subject from CCP. Acknowledgement would be nice, but to be honest, we're all getting quite a bit ahead of ourselves on this. We've expressed our current concerns and beating the dead horse another 20 pages won't make time go faster. There's not much to be done until CCP finishes Crimewatch. |
Madner Kami
Durendal Ascending Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
46
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 16:50:00 -
[397] - Quote
Klarion Sythis wrote:The team that will work on POSes is currently working on Crimewatch, which may not even be released by Winter. We're 3-6 months away from any serious thought on the subject from CCP. Acknowledgement would be nice, but to be honest, we're all getting quite a bit ahead of ourselves on this. We've expressed our current concerns and beating the dead horse another 20 pages won't make time go faster. There's not much to be done until CCP finishes Crimewatch.
Point beeing, it'd be usefull to get some sort of acknowledgement of the concerns beyond just a CSM-member who expressed repeatedly, to not have the same concerns. I don't trust politicians further then I can throw them |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
94
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 17:50:00 -
[398] - Quote
Klarion Sythis wrote:The team that will work on POSes is currently working on Crimewatch, which may not even be released by Winter. We're 3-6 months away from any serious thought on the subject from CCP. Acknowledgement would be nice, but to be honest, we're all getting quite a bit ahead of ourselves on this. We've expressed our current concerns and beating the dead horse another 20 pages won't make time go faster. There's not much to be done until CCP finishes Crimewatch. We are discussing amongst ourselves, trying to come to a consensus about what we want to ask CCP to do and what we want to ask CCP not to do. Once we can convince Two Step to present the views that the community wants, and not necessarily just his own ideas based on just his own experiences, he and the rest of the community will be ready for when CCP begins the design process.
If CCP is not even in the designing stages for the POS changes yet, then that is perfect. The time to be discussing these ideas is right now. If we wait and try to get our thoughts together and organized and try to work with the next CSM at the same time CCP is actually working on it, then they will have roughly mapped out what they want to do possibly before we even come to a consensus ourselves. By that point, it will be too late. Any chance that we had of CCP actually listening to us will be gone, and we'll get total crap as a result.
Now is the time to discuss our ideas together, not later.
|
Klarion Sythis
Bite Me inc Elysian Empire
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 18:38:00 -
[399] - Quote
Meytal, you have to take my post in context of this entire thread. There are people calling for Dev blogs and Dev interaction and that's unrealistic; CCP isn't there yet. We also have people taking advantage of this thread to attack Two step for obviously unrelated agendas or troll the general community (Slaktoid, SpaceSavage, etc.) so this thread is pretty cluttered with junk posts and redundant 3 page opinion pieces.
Sure, this needs to be discussed, but let's do so under the appropriate context:
- CCP isn't designing this yet; it's all ideas thrown at a dart board.
- Two step probably won't even be on the CSM when the bulk of the design work is being done (unless he's reelected). Depending on how Crimewatch goes, he might not be there when they start asking questions at all.
We're also highly unlikely to get a consensus with so many opinions.
If most people legitimately think Two step is likely to voice his opinions over the community's, then take Two step's advice and elect someone else during the year the POS redesign actually happens. That means someone else capable of doing it needs to step up for the community, but please god, don't start that process in this thread.
Otherwise, keep up the constructive posts that are sprinkled in here. |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
96
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 20:27:00 -
[400] - Quote
Klarion Sythis wrote:Otherwise, keep up the constructive posts that are sprinkled in here. Awesome. I was worried you were calling for an end to the discussion, so thanks for calming me down :) |
|
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
291
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 00:30:00 -
[401] - Quote
Here's the super hilarious part about having to scan down POSes.
A few years ago warp to zero didn't exist for stargates and people created bookmarks for them. They had to implement warp to zero because the terribad bm system was killing the server. The terribad bm system still eixsts. It will not take long for the server to go down in a hell fire with everyone BMing random POSes for scouting. |
Kynric
Sky Fighters Talocan United
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 07:12:00 -
[402] - Quote
Perhaps the present system of finding a POS and the 'anywhere idea' can co-exist. I suggest that if a tower is anchroed at a celestial object (i.e. moon) that it be found in the same way they currently are, however towers anchored anywhere else would have a 'navigational beacon' that would be found by the ship scanner. I suspect the 'anywhere' idea is inspired by a desire to make player homes widespread and that clearly the moons count in many areas of highsec would limit this. As such having structures at locations other than moons is probalby a feature we will have to live with. Also, clearly there need to have some limits on 'anywhere' as players errecting structures in asteroid belts, at gates, on the docking port of an existing stations, next to a poco or adjacent to other peoples towers would likely make life worse and not better.
I would like to hear more about details such as the transition plan, how much storage will be available for goods and ships, how many people will a tower comfortably support, what becomes of my old structures and so on. Will I log in one day and discover my old tower is suddnely something new, or will I have to rip it down, haul it out and drag something new in? |
Qual
Infinity Engine
14
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 07:58:00 -
[403] - Quote
Just reposting a thought I have posted on TwoSteps's blog, but I thought it might be better put here:
Quote:Ok, about the whole docking thing, imagine this. When you dock at the POS, you go to the normal station interface, exept that instead of the usual interior and ship to spin, to see the pos in space the same way you usually see the ship. (Which you could then spin, very important... :p ) Your ACTIVE ship would be tethering outside the POS. This actaully fix a LOT of issues.
- Others would be able to see active people docked, due to tethering.
- You would be able to see who is at the POS before undocking (or un-tethering as it is)
- Spy's would be able to still gather intel as jumping into other shipsfor fitting would actaully show them at the POS.
I know this is a more complex solution as it mixes current station environment with spce environment, but it could not hurt for CCP to think about it...
Disclaimer: I have not read throught this thread, so this or a similar idea might have be discussed already... |
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc. Talocan United
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 08:05:00 -
[404] - Quote
Another thing that FFs bring and seems to be overlooked since page 2 is range. Every small tower gets bashed just for the chance it might not have stront in it. And why do POCOs get RFed? Because you can do it with the standard armor-T3 gang. But to get a large tower down you need ships that can hit the tower. BS or dreads in most cases, which put a lot of mass on the entranceholes. If you take away FFs you allow the same fleetcomposition to do holecontrol and bashing. And they are almost immune to bombingruns or trying to snipe a (almost) stationary target, one of the few thing defenders can do when heavyly outnumbered. A well-defended POS can even force the attackers to field two entire different fleets and give the defender the chance to fight one of them. Armor-T3-fleet at your POS and you can-¦t apear further then 20km (f.e.) away leads only to instadeath of everyone undocking.
Also allowing only a number of ships to dock/moore/safehug a POS makes invasions with big fleets even more painful. "Let-¦s invade a home with a possible hostile force of 150? Ok if we want to be able for the same number of our pilots to go afk or log we-¦d have to bring in and set up 5 towers." The new POSses need an orca to haul it in? That-¦s going to be fun.
disclaimer: all numbers are made up. |
Ashera Yune
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
35
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 09:27:00 -
[405] - Quote
I personally would like the pos modules that can combine capital components into subsystems.
The time to build the subsystems combined will equal the current times to assemble a capital ship based on the subsystem blueprint.
These parts will be 100,000 m3 each and can be combined in an X-L assembly array to build a full complete capital ship in less than a few hours.
This will make pos sieging easier against people who refuse to fight back and hide in their pos.
Oh and too many people are in wormhole space, it'd be nice to evict farmers and lower classes from wormholes to make them more exclusive to only the more skilled and dedicated.
|
Kalel Nimrott
Wishful Desires Inc. Armada Assail
38
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 11:55:00 -
[406] - Quote
CSM & CCP Meeting minutes, May 30th wrote:CCP Greyscale suggested that perhaps the larger power cores (fuel consumption) might require freighters to move around, which would prevent them from getting into lower class wormholes.
Game desing balancing the game play? |
Dino Boff
Lead Farmers Kill It With Fire
12
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 11:36:00 -
[407] - Quote
Shilalasar wrote:Another thing that FFs bring and seems to be overlooked since page 2 is range. Every small tower gets bashed just for the chance it might not have stront in it. And why do POCOs get RFed? Because you can do it with the standard armor-T3 gang. But to get a large tower down you need ships that can hit the tower. BS or dreads in most cases, which put a lot of mass on the entranceholes. If you take away FFs you allow the same fleetcomposition to do holecontrol and bashing. And they are almost immune to bombingruns or trying to snipe a (almost) stationary target, one of the few thing defenders can do when heavyly outnumbered. A well-defended POS can even force the attackers to field two entire different fleets and give the defender the chance to fight one of them. Armor-T3-fleet at your POS and you can-¦t apear further then 20km (f.e.) away leads only to instadeath of everyone undocking.
Also allowing only a number of ships to dock/moore/safehug a POS makes invasions with big fleets even more painful. "Let-¦s invade a home with a possible hostile force of 150? Ok if we want to be able for the same number of our pilots to go afk or log we-¦d have to bring in and set up 5 towers." The new POSses need an orca to haul it in? That-¦s going to be fun.
disclaimer: all numbers are made up.
TLTR; force fields are good for w-space because ships flown in w-space can't be used to shoot them |
Kalel Nimrott
Wishful Desires Inc. Armada Assail
38
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 14:01:00 -
[408] - Quote
Stupid question, but, how many of you actually took the effort of reading the csm minutes? |
Gudrun Ellecon
Ghost Industries Inc
13
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 15:11:00 -
[409] - Quote
Kalel Nimrott wrote:Stupid question, but, how many of you actually took the effort of reading the csm minutes?
Why bother reading them? All that does is take away from the time you could spend complaining. |
Soon Shin
Caucasian Culture Club Transmission Lost
131
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 17:28:00 -
[410] - Quote
There is one thing that concerns me about the minutes. That is of ccp's idea of making pos takedown take weeks and is balanced around the hot drop fest of 0.0 |
|
kapolov
Hedion University Amarr Empire
16
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 21:07:00 -
[411] - Quote
@ Two Step
Can we have a CSM Town hall style meeting with you and leaders of most of the notable WH space entities, i think this would end threads like this reaching over 20 pages of confusing and trolls like me. |
Wolvun
Crimson Cell
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 21:15:00 -
[412] - Quote
kapolov wrote:@ Two Step
Can we have a CSM Town hall style meeting with you and leaders of most of the notable WH space entities, i think this would end threads like this reaching over 20 pages of confusing and trolls like me.
What the hell would that achieve? The guy has his viewpoints and doesn't want to listen to the overwhelming response to that at all when he disagrees.
Try getting him to discuss the comparison between large towers as an attempt to fortifying a C1-4 to the C5/6 fortifying their holes with large numbers of caps and the inherent problem with evicting a large well fortified group from a C5/6. The guy is very willing to nerf all low end w-space but unwilling to discuss at all nerfing his end of space. |
Kalel Nimrott
Wishful Desires Inc. Armada Assail
38
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 21:55:00 -
[413] - Quote
Wolvun, I took the effort of reading most of the CSM minutes regarding the new Starbase system and I can assure you that most of this thread lenght is due to missinformation and trolling. You can have some differences with what was said but you have to remember 2 things that was said there that would help you get in tune with it. First: NOTHING IS FINAL. Basically was a presentation of an idea that was in the mind of CCP. Second: Its a long way anything happening soon, so it may not happen at all.
I have a third for the ones that did not read it: JUMP DRIVES ON STARBASES! (WTF?) |
Madner Kami
Durendal Ascending Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
46
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 22:02:00 -
[414] - Quote
Kalel Nimrott wrote:First: NOTHING IS FINAL. Basically was a presentation of an idea that was in the mind of CCP. Second: Its a long way anything happening soon, so it may not happen at all.
Unfortunately the thing that seems to stirr up people the most, is the one thing which both the minutes and twosteps's posts display as pretty much set in stone: Forcefield removal. |
Pink Marshmellow
Caucasian Culture Club Transmission Lost
40
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 22:14:00 -
[415] - Quote
Without capital support, it is much more time consuming and difficult to take on large towers. This applies to C1-C4 space.
Because Forcefield on large towers are 27 km in radius, the only real way to destroy a pos is by using Battleships, which cannot fit in a C1, or a Tier 3 Battlecruiser with are poorly suited to taking down defended pos due to their fragility.
I don't know whether or not Forcefields should be removed, but I believe when pos bashing the Forcefield itself should be the target, rather than the tower. Meaning that you no longer need large or long range weaponry in order actually pos bash.
Once the forcefield 's hitpoints are gone, it should disappear leaving behind the pos which has no shields. |
Wolvun
Crimson Cell
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 22:14:00 -
[416] - Quote
Kalel Nimrott wrote:Wolvun, I took the effort of reading most of the CSM minutes regarding the new Starbase system and I can assure you that most of this thread lenght is due to missinformation and trolling. You can have some differences with what was said but you have to remember 2 things that was said there that would help you get in tune with it. First: NOTHING IS FINAL. Basically was a presentation of an idea that was in the mind of CCP. Second: Its a long way anything happening soon, so it may not happen at all.
I have a third for the ones that did not read it: JUMP DRIVES ON STARBASES! (WTF?)
I also read the minutes and i understand that nothing is set in stone but the person putting forward our views or doing so like he is supposed to be doing needs to listen to them before CCP starts coding or we will only have CCP's and Two Steps vision implemented.
What you fail to be reading in this thread is the many voices asking him not to go down the path of low end w-space nerfing and him completely determined to gimp all low end space. When the guy is committed to nerfing one end of w-space and unwilling to discuss the other end of w-space is a major problem to me, and if that's the position we go into when CCP starts coding then we are screwed. Perhaps you should read a bit more of the thread here yourself. |
XxRTEKxX
Fenrir's Dogs of War Union 0f Revolution
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.20 00:19:00 -
[417] - Quote
1. Access logs for corp hangars and ship maintenance arrays. ie. Pilot 1 boarded Drake(Tango{name of ship}) at 18:45 on such and such date. Pilot 1 stored Drake(Tango) at 19:30 on such and such date. Viewable by anyone with the role to view such logs.
2. Keys or Passwords to fly a ship. If I own a ship, have it stored in a ship maint array........I set a password for the ship, or have a ship key stored in cargo that allows a pilot with possession of the key or password to fly the ship. If I want to loan the ship to someone, I can leave them a temporary key in cargo(set to that pilot/character) or give them a temporary password that will allow them to board that ship for chosen set of time. Sort of like an alarm system, or key/ignition system. If cars and trucks can have them in real life, why not spaceships in the future?
3. Parameters to allow access to different POS modules to chosen pilots. Whether in corp/alliance or not. ie. I create a bpc for someone, and set it so that person can come into the pos shields and collect that item. Possibly only that item they can see and take. So I can store multiple items/ships etc, and only those I contract them to can take/see etc.
Basically, more and more options and controls over our POSs so we can customize access and usability to a greater extent than we currently have. |
Kalel Nimrott
Wishful Desires Inc. Armada Assail
38
|
Posted - 2012.08.20 03:05:00 -
[418] - Quote
Wolvun wrote:Kalel Nimrott wrote:Wolvun, I took the effort of reading most of the CSM minutes regarding the new Starbase system and I can assure you that most of this thread lenght is due to missinformation and trolling. You can have some differences with what was said but you have to remember 2 things that was said there that would help you get in tune with it. First: NOTHING IS FINAL. Basically was a presentation of an idea that was in the mind of CCP. Second: Its a long way anything happening soon, so it may not happen at all.
I have a third for the ones that did not read it: JUMP DRIVES ON STARBASES! (WTF?) I also read the minutes and i understand that nothing is set in stone but the person putting forward our views or doing so like he is supposed to be doing needs to listen to them before CCP starts coding or we will only have CCP's and Two Steps vision implemented. What you fail to be reading in this thread is the many voices asking him not to go down the path of low end w-space nerfing and him completely determined to gimp all low end space. When the guy is committed to nerfing one end of w-space and unwilling to discuss the other end of w-space is a major problem to me, and if that's the position we go into when CCP starts coding then we are screwed. Perhaps you should read a bit more of the thread here yourself.
I know you just want to rant and pick a forum fight, so lets have it. Read carefuly what I posted two post back. I actually referred to the problem of low end Wspace nerf and what was CCP answer to it. Also, If I`m telling you that nothing is final, then not even Wspace low end nerf is final. Tell me next time I`m too subtle for you
Edit: Actually, was 3 post back, but only counting mines. |
Wolvun
Crimson Cell
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.20 03:26:00 -
[419] - Quote
Kalel Nimrott wrote:Wolvun wrote:Kalel Nimrott wrote:Wolvun, I took the effort of reading most of the CSM minutes regarding the new Starbase system and I can assure you that most of this thread lenght is due to missinformation and trolling. You can have some differences with what was said but you have to remember 2 things that was said there that would help you get in tune with it. First: NOTHING IS FINAL. Basically was a presentation of an idea that was in the mind of CCP. Second: Its a long way anything happening soon, so it may not happen at all.
I have a third for the ones that did not read it: JUMP DRIVES ON STARBASES! (WTF?) I also read the minutes and i understand that nothing is set in stone but the person putting forward our views or doing so like he is supposed to be doing needs to listen to them before CCP starts coding or we will only have CCP's and Two Steps vision implemented. What you fail to be reading in this thread is the many voices asking him not to go down the path of low end w-space nerfing and him completely determined to gimp all low end space. When the guy is committed to nerfing one end of w-space and unwilling to discuss the other end of w-space is a major problem to me, and if that's the position we go into when CCP starts coding then we are screwed. Perhaps you should read a bit more of the thread here yourself. I know you just want to rant and pick a forum fight, so lets have it. Read carefuly what I posted two post back. I actually referred to the problem of low end Wspace nerf and what was CCP answer to it. Also, If I`m telling you that nothing is final, then not even Wspace low end nerf is final. Tell me next time I`m too subtle for you Edit: Actually, was 3 post back, but only counting mines.
Was it a rant? Did it bug you?
And i don't care for a forum fight, i only care that Two Step puts the views of a community above his own. That's all.
Actually i don't see any of your posts that even slightly mention low end w-space nerfs so yes too subtle indeed. Or should i put some words in for you?
And we clearly all know nothing is final, but should we just say nothing and wait until Two Step convinces them of the horrible nerf and then go hey no one wants this, why are you doing that CCP? And then when CCP has put to many resources into making it so that it would take another 5 years to reverse?
I only asked that Two Step be willing to discuss it further and in more detail than caps in lows are bad and towers are to hard mmmk
|
Kalel Nimrott
Wishful Desires Inc. Armada Assail
38
|
Posted - 2012.08.20 05:39:00 -
[420] - Quote
Kalel Nimrott wrote:CSM & CCP Meeting minutes, May 30th wrote:CCP Greyscale suggested that perhaps the larger power cores (fuel consumption) might require freighters to move around, which would prevent them from getting into lower class wormholes. Game desing balancing the game play? Edit: Now I know why such a system would be implemented. If you hide in Wspace and have no Walking in station, a Dust Dweller wont be able to shoot you in the face.
Still too subtle? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |