Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 27 post(s) |
Nitinol
Appetite 4 Destruction
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 03:58:00 -
[151] - Quote
Terrorfrodo wrote:Great changes Really nice updates for market window, and the best thing is that deadspace signatures do not decloak our ships anymore. The tooltips are too big and intrusive, but I could probably get used to it. Now that an option to delay them is already in the works it's fine though. Nitinol wrote:This is an unacceptable, and condescending response. Normal user's don't care about the structure of your data tables or whether a row's key has changed.
What I care about, and what James Selkirk cares about, is that you have changed the purpose of a core skill. If you had changed the gunnery skill to affect mining there would be riots in Jita again. Just because the impact is smaller, does not make the error trivial.
I want the SP back for the skill I trained, which no longer exists. period. You're complaining about a rank 2 skill nobody ever trained higher than level IV. We are talking about 90k SP here. Bitching about that is ridiculous. If "re-using" the skill for something else saved a few hours of dev time, it was definitely the right call to do it this way.
Where is the line, where this becomes unacceptable? If they threw away 1mil of your SP would be upset? 10mil? There shouldn't be a distinction. The skill rank or quantity of SP involved is not the point. The point is that they removed a skill and did not return the SP - which they have done for every case I can think of. If you only trained 90k into learning, you would have got that back... not had it replaced with an unrelated skill.
I wouldn't even had sounded off on it, if I didn't spot the dev's inconsiderate response. I weighed in as a matter of principle. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 04:27:00 -
[152] - Quote
Teibor wrote:how do i turn off the description which appears everytime i hover over a module when in space?
....cant find anything via the ESC menu to do it.
At the least we need a switch to turn it off on non-optimal type modules (I pretty much know the name of my cloaking device by now). Need a switch to hide it on these type of modules, sort of like the hide passive module switch.
|
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 04:31:00 -
[153] - Quote
James Selkirk wrote:Rapid patch deployment: check Client patched cleanly: check Patch works: check "Ethnic Relations skill changed into Diplomatic Relations. The old effect of segregating corporations by races is gone, so all corporations can have all races, always. The skill now reduces the cost to hire allies in war. The skill will not be reimbursed as it is not being removed, but changed." (Italics added) So, Ethnic Relations has a changed name and a changed function, yet somehow this does not count as removing a skill and adding a whole different skill. Because I trained Ethnic Relations to have a multicultural corporation, not to hire allies in wars I'm not about to get into. Please keep all comments on topic and non offensive. -ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
Said best. Probably endorse his censored remarks as well.
Seriously - did this propose change get published before commit? Did the CSM buy off on it (even though I have no respect for CSM, even they would have said SOMETHING)?
|
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 04:33:00 -
[154] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:James Selkirk wrote:Rapid patch deployment: check Client patched cleanly: check Patch works: check "Ethnic Relations skill changed into Diplomatic Relations. The old effect of segregating corporations by races is gone, so all corporations can have all races, always. The skill now reduces the cost to hire allies in war. The skill will not be reimbursed as it is not being removed, but changed." (Italics added) So, Ethnic Relations has a changed name and a changed function, yet somehow this does not count as removing a skill and adding a whole different skill. Because I trained Ethnic Relations to have a multicultural corporation, not to hire allies in wars I'm not about to get into. From a technical perspective, it's the same type with the same internal ID number. To count as removing a skill and adding a whole different skill - again, from a technical perspective - it'd mean deleting the old skill and adding a new one with a different ID.
Wow - really? Technically? CCP run out of numbers to describe a NEW skill???
|
Muffin Cups
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 04:36:00 -
[155] - Quote
Hello. I created a new char and took notes about the NPE. Hope this feedback helps. My toon is Min/Sebiestor bloodline.
Tutorial #1 Ohh green callout to Agent tab is sexy! And I can drag the tutorial window and it's always on top!
#2 Step 3 of 4 (closing windows) points a callout to Mission Journal.
However I've already removed Mission Journal from my neocom.
The callout reasonably points to the E button at the top of the Neocom but it still says 'This is your Mission Journal.'
#6 Ship Movement 'Activate the acceleration gate'
Why not mention holding D and clicking gate on overview works?
I read in a dev blog that you downplayed keyboard shortcuts / binds. Combined with good overview presets binds are REALLY handy for piloting.
#9 WTF?
Step 2 said:
Quote:Skills need to be trained. This converts them from an item in the world into information in your head. Once a skill is in your head, you'll never lose it.
...EXCEPT IF YOU GET PODKILLED IN AN INSUFFICIENT CLONE.
That is IMPORTANT and imo you should drill it into people's heads to keep clones updated, starting here in the tutorial! see notes on #23.
I already closed Inventory button, callout pointed to E button again. That's a sane default and of course very few will start by tweaking their neocom.
#14 Destroy the fuel depot.
What fuel depot? *overview tab All* Oh I didnt actually activate the gate yet... hit gate...
Nice in space callout and green overview background, as long as overview isnt scrolled away
'You need to target and destroy this fuel depot.' OK how do I target. Right click Fuel Depot and select lock target.
Please point out that you can select on overview as well as brackets in space. And that control click is bound to target.
Guess I'm a shortcut *****.
And come to think of it it's a lot faster to press F1 than to click my guns.
Wow nice explosion. I was zoomed in far and it filled a lot of the screen. I usually am zoomed out 100km so explosions suck most of the time.
#16 step 2 Fit my new shield booster? Awesome.
I still want key binds. How about this? Set a tooltip to show 'ALT F' when you mouse over the appropriate green text in tutorial prompts.
AW ****! I can't even fit this shield booster wth?
'You are required to have learned the following skills: Shield Operation.'
Oh right I forgot to actually start my skill training when you told me to. I injected instead of train to 1. Balls! You let me keep going without actually starting training! Guess I will wait 8 minutes. My bad.
#18: Interstellar Travel Screenshot says Location: Shesha. My screen says Location: Edmalbrurdus.
wtf? should i go to shesha?
obv different toons go to different stations. imo change the system name in the screenshot to ?????? - that should be clear enough.
step 2: "locate a stargate. their bracket looks like this" - move the icon to end of 2nd paragraph.
BTW if you don't say 'look in your overview for a stargate' you're gonna have ppl panning around in space looking for brackets and getting frustrated.
Maybe a convenient time to point out that stargates are at the top of overview sorted by icon.
#19: Inside the Academy 'Look at the ships' you could put a tooltip here for 'alt-click'
I look at the Minmatar Service Outpost LCO, a quafe logo catches my eye, I look closer. Jeez this is ugly. It looks like, idk the side view of a shopping mall, when I'm looking at the glowy textures. Sorry, as noob i'd expect giant space station to look sweet.
#20: The Mission Journal has the same issue as 18. the screenshot shows one out of many possible noob systems. again i suggest changing screenshotted destination to ??????.
step 3: Great, you address some of the overview stuff. I already had to scroll before to find the gate. You might wanna explain sorting columns before saying "because it's a long way away, [the stargate will] be down near the bottom of the list."
#22:
Aura wrote:To reach your destination, you will need to cross several solar systems. Because you've set a destination, you can activate your Autopilot. This will automatically warp your ship to the destination stargates and jump you through them. Autopilot warps are less accurate so this will lengthen your journey time, but it allows you to work on other things while you travel
you're missing a period at the end there. also. dont waste the characters. tell them straight out, 'autopilot warps land 15km from the gate, and you can manually warp to 0km, so the autopilot takes longer.'
#23:
Aura wrote:Be aware that unless you have invested in a high-grade clone, you will lose a percentage of skill points based on the quality of the clone you have and how many skills you have. At some point during this week, you will want to click on the Medical button on your station interface and upgrade your clone.
Change to:
Quote:Low grade clones remember fewer skill points than high grade clones. If a pilot's pod is destroyed, and his clone is insufficient, he LOSES SKILL POINTS. Never fly with a clone grade less than your total SP! You can upgrade clones at Medical services in many stations.
Back in station - nice, a callout for Medical service! As long as that tutorial page is still open.
By the end of the tutorial my eyes are hurting. I'm staring at fairly small text on a 24" monitor. I really wish I could use a bigger font in the tutorial window (and this EVE Notepad window too.)
#24 One final suggestion: last page of tutorial says in green 'Fly safe, capsuleer.'
Personal request to any devs who these notes help: change it to 'Fly safe, capsuleer. o7' |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 04:36:00 -
[156] - Quote
CCP Fear wrote:Regarding the module tool-tip:
We will be adding an option to disable them and possibly a delay as well in a patch very very soon! (Can't say specific dates yet I'm afraid)
Two options - 1) Turn off non-changing modules (MWD's, Cloak, hardners, etc) 2) Turn off all tips.
Does a delay really make sense? In the heat of the battle do we really want to be waiting on delays?
|
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 04:44:00 -
[157] - Quote
Tippia wrote:MajorSheppard wrote:i'm a little bit pissed right now.
The next time you change materials of a production please mention that in the patch notes and bring the patche notes up some days before the patch so ppl can plan their production accordingly.
I hope this will be better with the upcoming patches. Whenever they make these kinds of drastic changes, it's always a good idea to check in on sisi in the days before the patch. The numbers have been available there for a while now.
Sisi is CCP's new patch release notes platform? That's news!
|
mkint
840
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 06:13:00 -
[158] - Quote
regarding uni.inv:
-The open in new window option is nice, except it's a pain in the ass to find, even if you know it exists. Players will never consider inventory windows to be "primary" and "secondary" like devs are hoping, and if you try to force it you'll just **** people off.
still uni.inv related but not about new stuff: -inventory windows have so much wasted space. at least a 3rd of every inventory window I have is completely wasted space showing crap that's NOT inventory, and 9 of 10 times is not even remotely useful. Why do I need a search filter when opening a wreck? Why is the area with the icon sizes options almost entirely empty 100% of the time? Monitor real estate is already at a premium in EVE. None of the gimmicks using that real estate are valuable enough to take up that real estate 100% of the time. -the double-click-ship-boards-ship functionality still bugs me... I can't speak for everyone else, but a ship is as much a container as it is a ship. Especially for ships that are nothing but a container with engines attached. I'm not saying the old system was ideal, but the current system is just as bad, if not worse for certain work-flow processes. It seems like a quick workaround would be allowing shift-double-click on a ship to open it's cargo, though it's still not ideal. At least until the uni.inv can be thrown out and started over with an eye to efficient workflow.
I still find it odd how such a functionality breaking "feature" that caused so much fallout got so little iteration. I'm still lost about what value it actually adds to the client. Come on, you can do better than this... a little toggle switch isn't a whole patch-cycle's worth of work. I'd have liked to comment more about what changed, except hardly anything did (though what did is admittedly nice.) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8960
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 06:13:00 -
[159] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Sisi is CCP's new patch release notes platform? That's news! No, but if you suspect that a secondary set of stats might have changed due to a large update to some particular item, sisi will probably give you better answers and details than the patch notes even if the thing is included in those notes.
Yes, they probably should have noted that the build requirements will change as part of the revamp, but even if they did, they wouldn't have listed all the BP information and people would have had to go and look for themselves if they wanted the details (or just keep an eye on the market and industry forums).
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
AshenShugar01
TunDraGon
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 06:39:00 -
[160] - Quote
good god, the module tool tip..... whats the point of that?
Click on Afterburner - "This is an afterburner" Click on Cloaking Device - "this is a cloaking device" Click on Warfare link - "this is a warfare link"
Work of real genius that, its great to be reminded ALL THE TIME what module you are turning on, epsecially when the modules are completely benign, on guns maybe especially for new players but come on really? Do we need it for EVERY SINGLE MODULE?
We are not WOW players, we do not need EVE spoon fed to us. Why release this feature without an option to turn it off? You had to know that most existing players will just be annoyed at it rather then grateful for the 'help'.... |
|
Adria Eqviis
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 06:39:00 -
[161] - Quote
Where'd the T2 resists on Exhumers go? Did I miss something? Skiff/Mack/Hulk all have 0/50/40/20 on the shield, didn't they have something like 0/50/85/60 before, as in Gallente T2 resists? I distinctly remember putting an EM mod on to get a viable omnitank...
(did try to search before asking, didn't find anything, my apologies if I missed it somewhere...)
-Adria |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8960
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 06:47:00 -
[162] - Quote
Adria Eqviis wrote:Where'd the T2 resists on Exhumers go? They are just no longer included in the base stats on the info sheet.
Before, you had that 7.5% bonus per level in a skill that you had to have at lvl V to fly the ship, so they just included the total 37.5% in the base stats for the resists (most clearly shown by the 37.5% EM shield resist) because why not bake it into the stats since it will always be that high since you could not possibly be in the ship if the skill was lower?
After the patch, you only get 5% bonus, and they chose not to bake it into the stats like that. You still get that 25% bonus, but it will be calculated GÇ£properlyGÇ¥ every time.
In a sense, it's better this way, since the old info sheet kind of suggested that you'd get another 37.5% bonus on top of what looked like 37.5% base resist, when in fact the two were the same. That implied (but not actual) duplication is now gone. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
Adria Eqviis
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 06:50:00 -
[163] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Adria Eqviis wrote:Where'd the T2 resists on Exhumers go? They are just no longer included in the base stats on the info sheet. Before, you had that 7.5% bonus per level in a skill that you had to have at lvl V to fly the ship, so they just included the total 37.5% in the base stats for the resists (most clearly shown by the 37.5% EM shield resist) because why not bake it into the stats since it will always be that high since you could not possibly be in the ship if the skill was lower? After the patch, you only get 5% bonus, and they chose not to bake it into the stats like that. You still get that 25% bonus, but it will be calculated GÇ£properlyGÇ¥ every time. In a sense, it's better this way, since the old info sheet kind of suggested that you'd get another 37.5% bonus on top of what looked like 37.5% base resist, when in fact the two were the same. That implied (but not actual) duplication is now gone.
Ah, you're right, thanks. They never had "T2 resists" as such and that was just the bonus pre-calculated into the attributes. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8960
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 06:52:00 -
[164] - Quote
Adria Eqviis wrote:Ah, you're right, thanks. They never had "T2 resists" as such and that was just the bonus pre-calculated into the attributes. Much more succinct way of saying it. I'll steal that one for the next time someone asks.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
Untouchable Heart
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
35
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 07:12:00 -
[165] - Quote
Layla Ravensclaw wrote:thats new patch is a big crap, cus its support players that play on multiaccounts not players thats have one account. The best exaple is the Hulk. Ok ist have more ehp ,But the full boni get you only with orca support. That means to me that i skill 3 month for nothing ( skilling the hulk) and througth 280 millions out off the window My former 17 k Hulk is now an overpriced Procuerer! Thats is the badest Patch ever in eve!
Yup. Again the cosmetical changes. The unified inventory still a big ****. The most ridiculous thing the "ship rebalance" what they delayed, remember for http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=9129 blog . The 4 frigate rebalance changes could a realy big and hard work what is possible to change in their ship editor within 30 seconds. Well done. |
Griffin Omanid
IntersteIIar Moneymakers
11
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 07:20:00 -
[166] - Quote
Layla Ravensclaw wrote:I thougth thats a patch should repair bugs and rebalance the game. Today has CCP shown how fast can you destroy a godd game with one patch Cus thats patch is a good reasone to stop playing eve forever. and i said it again theat patch is crap! They transform out off the retiver and the mack now a cruiser in a Titanclassvessel . And the hulk transform them to a frig !
Just use the patch as a hint to use a more defensiv fitting on a Exhumer then you did before, and just switch to a Mackinow.
But on the other side i wait for the gankers complaining about loosing their easy targets, I-¦m sure it will sounds like: "Why do i have to use a Tier3-BC to gank a skiff. This totally destroyed my EVE now i need to invest 100 mill isk to gank a 300 mill ship, not like before where 4 destroyers for 10 mill were enough. You totally destroyed my game..." |
Dakman Frogger
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 08:18:00 -
[167] - Quote
For some reason, I cannot read parts of dialogue and other player names. They just appear as corrupted characters or repeating ones like DddDDd d dd or something like that. |
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
27
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 08:30:00 -
[168] - Quote
My assessment so far on this patch:
Barges/Exhumers: mostly great, EHP isn't there like it was on sisi
Ship rebalancing: should've started years ago, going to take far too long to be truly useful anytime soon.
Tooltip: how the hell do I turn this off? Takes up too much space and most modules give no relevant info .
Ethnic Relations: went from a necesary skill for a decent sized corp to a tax writeoff adjustment. Not a skill I'd bother training now, give me the SP back. I'll use it somewhere else.
removing the market search tab: fail, put it back dammit.
nice job re-adding the rightclick options for ore bay, drone bay and corp hangar, just want to point out a corp hangar has 7 divisions why is it only opening one? |
El'ismhur Khunsiu
Aries Engineering Quasar Generation
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 08:34:00 -
[169] - Quote
About new Frigate :
Thx for this new frigate but they are perhaps some adjustement to make.
If you take the both armor frigate (Executionner and Altron).
They are some problem with the role and the rigs (same for interceptor).
Armor Rigs = draw back on Speed. Astronautics Rigs = draw back on Armor.
Buffer armor (plate) = malus on agility and speed.
Perhaps that will be a good idea to put all "interceptor in shield tanking" or make some modification on the draw back. |
|
CCP Prism X
C C P C C P Alliance
721
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 08:57:00 -
[170] - Quote
There is no rounding bug with R.A.M. tools. This changed waay back when we were uniforming the Sience and Industry code paths.
You don't have to like it or agree with it, but the design is if you want to "reuse" your RAM like that you'll have to use up more assembly lines. This here:
MR rockafella wrote:The result is that a build of 100 runs/units of X-something that requires 50% of r.a.m.- tool one whould require 50 of r.a.m.-tool but build quota window wont accept 50 r.a.m.- tool it will only accept when 100 r.a.m.- tool is there and once build is press it only removes 50 r.a.m.- tool and there is 50 r.a.m.- tool left. Is by design.
And please don't get mad at my coworkers because they do not know the reasons for something I did almost five years back (and the other people involved are sadly no longer with us). They're just trying to help where they can and they couldn't in this case. @CCP_PrismX EVE Database Developer and Expert Ranter |
|
|
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
617
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 09:05:00 -
[171] - Quote
Many devs died to bring you this information. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8962
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 09:25:00 -
[172] - Quote
CCP Prism X wrote:You don't have to like it or agree with it, but the design is if you want to "reuse" your RAM like that you'll have to use up more assembly lines. But why? What was the purpose of the design?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
617
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 09:29:00 -
[173] - Quote
They should have just nerfed its cargo bay, so it couldn't carry enough RAM, and would depend on other POSs to bring it more RAM. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
|
CCP Prism X
C C P C C P Alliance
721
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 09:34:00 -
[174] - Quote
It's been a long time Tippia. My purpose was to have all damage material components behave in as a uniform way as possible. I could make an argument of initial investment cost vs production cost but I'm not 100% certain that the game designer involved saw it like that and I cant ask him as he doesn't work here anymore.
But I'm not trying to convince anybody that this is the perfect lay of the land. You don't have to agree but it doesn't change facts or the point of my post: This is the design as opposed to the issue having been ignored for five years. @CCP_PrismX EVE Database Developer and Expert Ranter |
|
Desmont McCallock
203
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 09:40:00 -
[175] - Quote
Same as in Biochemical reactions. Reaction requires say 100 water and produces 95 water along with the desirable product. Same goes for Alchemy (once product gets refined).
It's game mechanics. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
617
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 09:45:00 -
[176] - Quote
CCP Prism X wrote:It's been a long time Tippia. My purpose was to have all damage material components behave in as a uniform way as possible. I could make an argument of initial investment cost vs production cost but I'm not 100% certain that the game designer involved saw it like that and I cant ask him as he doesn't work here anymore.
But I'm not trying to convince anybody that this is the perfect lay of the land. You don't have to agree but it doesn't change facts or the point of my post: This is the design as opposed to the issue having been ignored for five years.
So your saying this is actually a major issue, due to coding?
It kind of seems like a paper cut issue, and could be solved fast. But are you saying it is bigger then that, despite appearances, and actually would take a long time to solve? I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8962
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 09:47:00 -
[177] - Quote
CCP Prism X wrote:It's been a long time Tippia. My purpose was to have all damage material components behave in as a uniform way as possible. I could make an argument of initial investment cost vs production cost but I'm not 100% certain that the game designer involved saw it like that and I cant ask him as he doesn't work here anymore.
But I'm not trying to convince anybody that this is the perfect lay of the land. You don't have to agree but it doesn't change facts or the point of my post: This is the design as opposed to the issue having been ignored for five years. Fair enough. I'm mainly interested in how it came to be. I kind of assumed that it was something along the lines of applying a general pattern, but you never know.
If nothing else, it keeps my R.A.M. sales going since people need stacks of 100:s to produce runs that only need 10 to complete.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
556
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 09:49:00 -
[178] - Quote
Tippia wrote:CCP Prism X wrote:It's been a long time Tippia. My purpose was to have all damage material components behave in as a uniform way as possible. I could make an argument of initial investment cost vs production cost but I'm not 100% certain that the game designer involved saw it like that and I cant ask him as he doesn't work here anymore.
But I'm not trying to convince anybody that this is the perfect lay of the land. You don't have to agree but it doesn't change facts or the point of my post: This is the design as opposed to the issue having been ignored for five years. Fair enough. I'm mainly interested in how it came to be. I kind of assumed that it was something along the lines of applying a general pattern, but you never know. If nothing else, it keeps my R.A.M. sales going since people need stacks of 100:s to produce runs that only need 10 to complete.
It's hardly a big deal anyway.
How to stop it being an issue at all: Keep enough stock that you don't fall below the 'magic number'. It's not like they go off if you don't use them. FuzzWork Enterprises http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Blueprint calculator, invention chance calculator, isk/m3 Ore chart-á and other 'useful' utilities. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8962
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 09:52:00 -
[179] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:How to stop it being an issue at all: Keep enough stock that you don't fall below the 'magic number'. It's not like they go off if you don't use them. GǪalthough that kind of degradation would be outright hilarious (and profitable)
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
kevs5678
Brutor Incorporated 0riginals
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 09:56:00 -
[180] - Quote
quote=kevs5678]kevs5678 wrote:Exploration & Deadspace
GÇó Some DED 3/10 sites allowed battleships to enter, now they cannot
Was the intention to not allow Battlecruisers too ?
e.g
Angel repurposed outpost will now not allow a hurricane, yet it willl allow a loki or tengu and other Tech 3 strategic cruisers which are surely stronger and carry more firepower.
Seems pretty silly TBH
Is it possible for a dev to answer this so we know if this is a bug or is it intended ? so all us non tech3 explorers know whats happening Thx[/quote]
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |