Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 75 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 31 post(s) |
RLCHANCE
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 15:56:00 -
[2101]
Hay update low sec! screw 0.0!!
|
Madcapnl
The Rising Stars -Mostly Harmless-
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 15:59:00 -
[2102]
Originally by: Rumpelstilski
The cowardly cloaking gankers (that were, btw, bold enough to jump normal stargates to your base of operations to give you grief) are providing you with content in the forms of pumping adrenaline, free targets without the need of jumping too many gates and are doing your alliance a favor by weeding out the lame and the stupid, much like Mittani said on another forum:
It seems you think ganking is indeed interesting and fun PVP. In that we differ then. Ofcourse no-one would pass up on a target of opportunity, but to consider ganking pve ships leet or fun, I dunno. But you are entitled to your opinion. Like I said, I rather die in a fair fight, where the enemy truly outskilled me. Then I will write "GF" in local and we both had fun (and some tears for me, but yeah...). CCP should focus on bringing that kind of PVP to nullsec instead of randomly adjusting stuff.
|
Rumpelstilski
Caldari Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 16:00:00 -
[2103]
Originally by: Madcapnl Rage all you want, but my points still stand. And I wonder whether you have ever lived in nullsec, because if you did, you would know that intel channels are by no means 100% secure and you would also know that the nearest PVP ship might not be in the system you are currently carebearing in. Hence travel time etc. But thank you for informing me what I *SHOULD* do.
If ONLY players could have some kind of for all practical purposes invulnerable structures in space where they could leave their pvp assets only a warp away so they could reship once hostiles enter your area.... :dreaming:
You, my friend, will be the first they put against the wall when the revolution comes.
Originally by: Madcapnl Now, about defending space...why shouldnt the defender get an advantage?
You mean something in the lines of intel, numbers, active titans, jump bridges, clones, reship time, docking, cyno beacons, fleet composition, supercaps in cyno jammed systems, allies and safe POSes?
Sure, but the current system is a bit extreme, wouldn't you agree?
|
Rumpelstilski
Caldari Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 16:02:00 -
[2104]
Edited by: Rumpelstilski on 14/05/2011 16:03:44
Originally by: Madcapnl It seems you think ganking is indeed interesting and fun PVP. In that we differ then. Ofcourse no-one would pass up on a target of opportunity, but to consider ganking pve ships leet or fun, I dunno. But you are entitled to your opinion. Like I said, I rather die in a fair fight, where the enemy truly outskilled me. Then I will write "GF" in local and we both had fun (and some tears for me, but yeah...). CCP should focus on bringing that kind of PVP to nullsec instead of randomly adjusting stuff.
I said no such thing, ofc.
Cloaky ganking, chill camping, jumping 60 jumps to catch an odd friggie jumping, it's boring as hell. But the tears you get from your forum later, now that... That makes it all worthwhile.
|
Bizmarhk
Mafia Redux
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 16:10:00 -
[2105]
Changes in this direction are long overdue.
Some of you newcomers don't realize there was a time when there weren't any jump bridges at all. It gave Eve a greater sense of openess, and created interesting challenges for the inhabitants of 0.0. Having someone "in your pipe" was actually a challenge to counter, especially if it was a small, and agile gang. The way it has been for years now is, "oh someone is in the pipe get the JB x, and if they move towards this area use JB y." No matter what the aggressor does, the home team has a terribly unfair advantage.
And I don't want to see some kind of rebutal of "oh well we live there so of course we should have an advantage." No, you shouldn't. 0.0 is supposed to be a cold hard place, not some kind of space where you jump into the first 0.0, hit up a JB or dock in your station because most alliances have a station now in the 0.0 entry, then skip over 15 jumps in the matter of two using JBs.
CCP good job. Really would like to see JBs gone all together though.
MFRX (Mafia Redux) Recruiting PvPers specialized in small gang warfare. |
Rumpelstilski
Caldari Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 16:15:00 -
[2106]
Edited by: Rumpelstilski on 14/05/2011 16:20:15
Originally by: Madcapnl Maybe you want us to put a free unarmed hauler in every system for you to shoot as "game content".
It's something to put before shamis if Tribute falls, I'm sure there's an agreement between reasonable people to be had.
|
Madcapnl
The Rising Stars -Mostly Harmless-
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 16:25:00 -
[2107]
Originally by: Bizmarhk Changes in this direction are long overdue.
Some of you newcomers don't realize there was a time when there weren't any jump bridges at all. It gave Eve a greater sense of openess, and created interesting challenges for the inhabitants of 0.0. Having someone "in your pipe" was actually a challenge to counter, especially if it was a small, and agile gang. The way it has been for years now is, "oh someone is in the pipe get the JB x, and if they move towards this area use JB y." No matter what the aggressor does, the home team has a terribly unfair advantage.
And I don't want to see some kind of rebutal of "oh well we live there so of course we should have an advantage." No, you shouldn't. 0.0 is supposed to be a cold hard place, not some kind of space where you jump into the first 0.0, hit up a JB or dock in your station because most alliances have a station now in the 0.0 entry, then skip over 15 jumps in the matter of two using JBs.
CCP good job. Really would like to see JBs gone all together though.
My last post in this thread, since we are gonna disagree anyway and CCP will do whatever they please anyway, until they realise subscribers rates are going down (or not; thats yet to see). You say 0.0 is "supposed to be a cold hard place". Why? Because you say so or because it creates content or CCP wants it or what?
|
Rumpelstilski
Caldari Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 16:38:00 -
[2108]
Edited by: Rumpelstilski on 14/05/2011 16:44:23
Originally by: Madcapnl My last post in this thread, since we are gonna disagree anyway and CCP will do whatever they please anyway, until they realise subscribers rates are going down (or not; thats yet to see). You say 0.0 is "supposed to be a cold hard place". Why? Because you say so or because it creates content or CCP wants it or what?
Eve's main selling point when compared to the swarm of other mmorpgs is that it's most hard core of all mmorpgs, the player drama, the high stakes, the dangers and riches of 0.0, the adrenaline, the anguish and the gloating, the rise and fall of great empires, that is what generates content that CCP in turn uses to attract new players and to fuel ambition and obsession in current players.
You, my friend, are generating player content as we speak and I'm most grateful.
|
Messy Beaver
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 16:49:00 -
[2109]
Originally by: Madcapnl Rage all you want, but my points still stand. And I wonder whether you have ever lived in nullsec, because if you did, you would know that intel channels are by no means 100% secure and you would also know that the nearest PVP ship might not be in the system you are currently carebearing in. Hence travel time etc. But thank you for informing me what I *SHOULD* do.
This change will not mean more PVP, it will mean less PVP. So in your twisted mind I should be thankful for this change, since then I can sit in my Bear ship all day.
Now, about defending space...why shouldnt the defender get an advantage? I mean, a roving band of bad guys can spent all their iskies on leeet PVP fits and the defending alliance has to content with the upkeep of a lot stuff. Also the invaders have the element of suprise. Even with 100% acurate intel, the defenders still need to get into PVP ships, get fleet organised etc. So an advantage in the form of rapid travel isnt as bad as you might think.
Small/medium well skilled alliances used to be able to disrupt the day to day events of the larger alliances. The trade off was that they couldn't really threaten the sov of these larger alliances. Their best hope was to cause weeks of atrition and hope the alliance would failcascade.
Then CCP made some changes to the game, along with the more is best attitude it totally destroyed the smaller alliances ability to take, hold space(with the exception of pets) or disrupt larger alliances. Now CCP have started to readdress the balance, the larger alliances still have the numbers but hopefully with future changes after this proposed one the smaller alliances will again have some sort of say.
You do have advantages, you have scouts on your entry systems, free repair stations, clones, reshipping, you still have jump bridges, intel channels. If you don't think these advantages are enough then it is because you truly are awful at this game.
Oh and if you guys really wanted pvp, what's to stop you having campaigns against your allies in between conflicts on a no sov basis.Or install a smaller entity purely for pvp rather than letting in useless pets(that's your alliance btw) Why don't you just admit it? you want to grind isk and be left alone. I'd have more respect for you if you did. |
ssgt slaughter
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 17:31:00 -
[2110]
cp fallout has taken a huge step with his hasty decision. great now logistics are going to be a nightmare for who oh the players who supply jita with building materails awesome. we can use capital ships you say. great idea but cap ships are race specific fuels of which are not evenly distributed throughout eve really smart. jump bridges were intially introduced for another reason than defense. speed of logistics it will now take a millemium of time to travel from deeper areas of null to markets lets face the fact more time higher costs. maybe now the null sec regional alliances will unite and set up thier own market heads and bleed jita dry of resources once and for all. seems to me a resonable response to a unreasonable nerf. oh for all of you pvpers which i enjoy pvp what does this all mean for you? you wont be smiling when the ships you lose in combat become twice exspensive to buy and you have to travel all over hells acres to get them.ccp fallout im sure didnt think this through for more than an hour before he came up with this awesome plan.
|
|
major hannah
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 17:50:00 -
[2111]
i love this ssgt slaughter guy finally a idea to kill the scum in jita.
null sec untie the battle cry is
BLEED JITA DRY
lets put it onto ccp to scramble to save thier prescious jita
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 19:33:00 -
[2112]
Originally by: major hannah i love this ssgt slaughter guy finally a idea to kill the scum in jita.
null sec untie the battle cry is
BLEED JITA DRY
lets put it onto ccp to scramble to save thier prescious jita
I'm pretty sure CCP would be delighted to see Jita's trade hub function dispersed. I too wish you the very best of luck with this endeavour.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Ryan Starwing
Gallente Cryptonym Sleepers Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 20:39:00 -
[2113]
Force projection is done with supercaps which uses cyno's not jb, and for moving subcaps fleets there is this realy cool thing called a titan bridge which is used for any real force projection fleet; this lets you drop off the fleet anywere within bridge range or onto another titan for those extra long distance fights.
For alliance level logistics there is this thing called jump frieghters which can cyno around their stuffs. If a regular frieghter is needed then a titan bridge will be used for it.
All this realy does is for the adverage person you need to have a scout in a combate frig, or train for caps and cyno around. People should be watching intel anyways in case the jb is camped by those hit and run stealth bombers which sometimes use a high speed saber to bubble bridge (cant jump if pointed or bubbled) and gtfo before pos locks them.
This is more of a sub cap nerf for lower sp players in null. Yay for super spam.
PS:To make this effective remove supers, cap ships, jump freighters, and anything jump to a cyno or make a bridge from the game.
|
ssgt slaughter
|
Posted - 2011.05.14 21:28:00 -
[2114]
yes the jump freighter logistics scenario. of which a recent exploit has been discovered and ccp is currently investigating. thanks for bringing up the topic. ccp needs to fix the game before they keep making foolish changes that will have hurendous effects on the player base.
|
HolyNerfBatman
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 00:46:00 -
[2115]
Originally by: Ryan Starwing Force projection is done with supercaps which uses cyno's not jb, and for moving subcaps fleets there is this realy cool thing called a titan bridge which is used for any real force projection fleet; this lets you drop off the fleet anywere within bridge range or onto another titan for those extra long distance fights.
For alliance level logistics there is this thing called jump frieghters which can cyno around their stuffs. If a regular frieghter is needed then a titan bridge will be used for it.
All this realy does is for the adverage person you need to have a scout in a combate frig, or train for caps and cyno around. People should be watching intel anyways in case the jb is camped by those hit and run stealth bombers which sometimes use a high speed saber to bubble bridge (cant jump if pointed or bubbled) and gtfo before pos locks them.
This is more of a sub cap nerf for lower sp players in null. Yay for super spam.
PS:To make this effective remove supers, cap ships, jump freighters, and anything jump to a cyno or make a bridge from the game.
Cry more.
|
Glyken Touchon
Independent Alchemists
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 01:03:00 -
[2116]
What bothers me about this is the rush. Would it really have hurt to give a month or so's notice for people to make the changes required?
As to the change itself, yes, it's a downgrade of JB. I wouldn't really call it a nerf though. They are still a massive advantage.
As to comments about wrecking the sandbox, what can you do now that this change will prevent?
- Having to use a jumpgate between 2 of your own systems isn't preventing anything.
- Cap ships can get around without JB anyway
so, the only thing prevented is getting jump-capable ships in to a jammed system. (Even this can be worked around)
Would be interesting to hear the logic behind the JF decision though- I'd have thought that it would be better to keep consistency by using the same exclusion list as gates.
When it comes to any mechanic/rule, use of words like "except" and "unless" should be minimised to avoid complication, especially any ones that affect newer players.
|
Kiyohime Ronuken
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 01:49:00 -
[2117]
The problem with trying to re-empower the 'little guys' is that by now the truly 'big' guys are large enough that a change like this will be annoying at most.
Caps can still go pretty much wherever - I see more beacons and jammer cycling in the future. Funny - I thought this was just the kind of annoyance JBs were made to overcome.
Caps using fuel this way will be harder on ice miners. Because... you know - they needed their teeth kicked further down their collective necks.
Subcaps can still go wherever, too. The result of this for the bigger alliances is 2 adjacent systems will be found for bridges. You'll jump into a system that's got its gates bubbled (dozens, maybe hundreds) except for one stargate. Fleet that jumps in takes that stargate to a convenient adjacent system. It too is bubbled like mad. Warp to JB - pOoF and you're on your way.
The really big alliances (with Titans) may also generally stay more confined to corp's 'home' systems BUT when they need to move in force, light a beacon, cycle a jammer and bridge over the fleet needed.
I'm still looking for the advantage for the little guy. If you think the advantage is that they can now go to the heart of these big alliances and gate camp.... well. Good luck with that.
|
frivolous
Reikoku
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 06:04:00 -
[2118]
Edited by: frivolous on 15/05/2011 06:05:28 Nice work CCP, these changes almost have me wanting to renew my accounts (almost).
Now remove local in 0.0 and I will re-sub and so will many many others.
edit - NC tears DELICIOUS
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba Northern Coalition.
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 09:08:00 -
[2119]
I love this thread.
This signature is brought to you by Nvidia(tm) |
Selnix
Gallente North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 09:42:00 -
[2120]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Furb Killer Well then at least we can agree on removing unprobable ships from the game, no more easy mode.
No disagreement there. I'm pretty sure you'll get your wish too :)
Dearest Soundwave,
While I do love that you have finally chosen to give people reason to use those stargate thingers that the art department made us new models for a while back, please do make a couple of changes to the Warfare Processor subsystems for Tech III Cruisers before you remove unprobability.
- Role Bonus: 99% reductin in Warfare Link module CPU need. Can use 3 Warfare Link modules simultaneously.
- Subsystem Skill Bonus: 7.5% bonus to all Shield(Minmatar & Caldari)/Armor(Gallente & Amarr) resistances per level
I see no reason to not make them just as vulnerable to being probed down as any other ship, but if they are going to be put back in the battle where they belong it would be nice if they can fill their given role without mids full of command processors and lows full of co-procs. Let them tank like a Command Ship and get doomsday'd like command ships.
|
|
Grimpak
Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 11:06:00 -
[2121]
Originally by: Selnix
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Furb Killer Well then at least we can agree on removing unprobable ships from the game, no more easy mode.
No disagreement there. I'm pretty sure you'll get your wish too :)
Dearest Soundwave,
While I do love that you have finally chosen to give people reason to use those stargate thingers that the art department made us new models for a while back, please do make a couple of changes to the Warfare Processor subsystems for Tech III Cruisers before you remove unprobability.
- Role Bonus: 99% reductin in Warfare Link module CPU need. Can use 3 Warfare Link modules simultaneously.
- Subsystem Skill Bonus: 7.5% bonus to all Shield(Minmatar & Caldari)/Armor(Gallente & Amarr) resistances per level
I see no reason to not make them just as vulnerable to being probed down as any other ship, but if they are going to be put back in the battle where they belong it would be nice if they can fill their given role without mids full of command processors and lows full of co-procs. Let them tank like a Command Ship and get doomsday'd like command ships.
do that and change the bonus from 5% to 3% then. ---
Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
FellRaven
Minmatar Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 12:47:00 -
[2122]
Originally by: Selnix
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Furb Killer Well then at least we can agree on removing unprobable ships from the game, no more easy mode.
No disagreement there. I'm pretty sure you'll get your wish too :)
Dearest Soundwave,
While I do love that you have finally chosen to give people reason to use those stargate thingers that the art department made us new models for a while back, please do make a couple of changes to the Warfare Processor subsystems for Tech III Cruisers before you remove unprobability.
- Role Bonus: 99% reductin in Warfare Link module CPU need. Can use 3 Warfare Link modules simultaneously.
- Subsystem Skill Bonus: 7.5% bonus to all Shield(Minmatar & Caldari)/Armor(Gallente & Amarr) resistances per level
I see no reason to not make them just as vulnerable to being probed down as any other ship, but if they are going to be put back in the battle where they belong it would be nice if they can fill their given role without mids full of command processors and lows full of co-procs. Let them tank like a Command Ship and get doomsday'd like command ships.
Why? I for one believe the T2 ships which require more training by the way, should be better at their intended roles than a T3 or Faction cruiser. ISK should not be a substitute for skill points.
|
NotTheSmartestCookie
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 13:07:00 -
[2123]
Originally by: FellRaven ... ISK should not be a substitute for skill points.
In the NC the blob is the substitute for skill (points).
|
Don Kartel
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 13:16:00 -
[2124]
These changes are proof that CCP comes up with ideas and just throws them into the game.
Seriously do you think 7 days is a fair amount of time for alliances to reconfigure their infrastructure ?
An advanced network infrastructure upgrade requires a level 3 strategic index which if not present requires 35 days to gain. Does your 7 days still seem reasonable ?
How are you going to rebalance the cost of having these upgrades ?
You have just reduced the benefits by 50% so are you going to reduce the cost also in a similar manner.
What about upgrades that are fitted in iHubs which are now obsolete ?
Alliances are going to have to change systems which means buy new ihubs and buy new upgrades because the current mechanics will not allow the removal of already installed upgrades. Can alliance petition instead to have these removed ?
Clearly there is alot here the CCP game designers and developers never thought about and this suprises me because it just shows how little they either know about their own game or care about the consequnces of the chages they make.
This also all points to the fact CCP don't really plan the deployment but rather just throw changes in willy nilly. Look at the anomalies changes. I don't think that even came close to having its desired effect.
|
Spartan dax
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 13:40:00 -
[2125]
Originally by: Don Kartel Seriously do you think 7 days is a fair amount of time for alliances to reconfigure their infrastructure ?
They clearly don't as that particular change won't occur for another month.
Have a tissue and calm down. The sky isn't falling.
|
Selnix
Gallente North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 13:49:00 -
[2126]
Originally by: FellRaven
Originally by: Selnix
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Furb Killer Well then at least we can agree on removing unprobable ships from the game, no more easy mode.
No disagreement there. I'm pretty sure you'll get your wish too :)
Dearest Soundwave,
While I do love that you have finally chosen to give people reason to use those stargate thingers that the art department made us new models for a while back, please do make a couple of changes to the Warfare Processor subsystems for Tech III Cruisers before you remove unprobability.
- Role Bonus: 99% reductin in Warfare Link module CPU need. Can use 3 Warfare Link modules simultaneously.
- Subsystem Skill Bonus: 7.5% bonus to all Shield(Minmatar & Caldari)/Armor(Gallente & Amarr) resistances per level
I see no reason to not make them just as vulnerable to being probed down as any other ship, but if they are going to be put back in the battle where they belong it would be nice if they can fill their given role without mids full of command processors and lows full of co-procs. Let them tank like a Command Ship and get doomsday'd like command ships.
Why? I for one believe the T2 ships which require more training by the way, should be better at their intended roles than a T3 or Faction cruiser. ISK should not be a substitute for skill points.
By your reasoning a Kronos should perform better than a Vindicator, a Vagabond should perform better than a Cynabal and a Keres should be able to stomp all over a Firetail. Just because a ship requires a different skill set does not mean it should necessarily be superior. There has to be a reason for people to want to commit their shiny expensive toys to a fight and a perceived advantage that you can gain from that ship is the only reason aside from Epeen that we don't all fly T1 insured BCs and BS in blobs of 3-500........
Guess I forgot what fleet mentality you subscribed to for a minute there.
|
Don Kartel
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 13:57:00 -
[2127]
Originally by: Spartan dax
Originally by: Don Kartel Seriously do you think 7 days is a fair amount of time for alliances to reconfigure their infrastructure ?
They clearly don't as that particular change won't occur for another month.
Have a tissue and calm down. The sky isn't falling.
Even so this still requires more than 1 months warning.
|
Don Kartel
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 14:01:00 -
[2128]
Edited by: Don Kartel on 15/05/2011 14:01:20
Originally by: NotTheSmartestCookie
Originally by: FellRaven ... ISK should not be a substitute for skill points.
In the NC the blob is the substitute for skill (points).
In the DRF / PL / RAIDEN ETC bots are the substitute for active players. Spend a few hours in the south every system has botting characters. You can bet if CCP actually posted information about the many bots have been found in each alliance the top would be either WN or the botting alliance called white angels. WRENT currently consists of about 90% botters.
|
FellRaven
Minmatar Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 14:34:00 -
[2129]
Edited by: FellRaven on 15/05/2011 14:36:20
Originally by: Selnix Well then at least we can agree on removing unprobable ships from the game, no more easy mode - Original post
No disagreement there. I'm pretty sure you'll get your wish too :)- Soundwave
Dearest Soundwave,
While I do love that you have finally chosen to give people reason to use those stargate thingers that the art department made us new models for a while back, please do make a couple of changes to the Warfare Processor subsystems for Tech III Cruisers before you remove unprobability.
- Role Bonus: 99% reductin in Warfare Link module CPU need. Can use 3 Warfare Link modules simultaneously.
- Subsystem Skill Bonus: 7.5% bonus to all Shield(Minmatar & Caldari)/Armor(Gallente & Amarr) resistances per level
I see no reason to not make them just as vulnerable to being probed down as any other ship, but if they are going to be put back in the battle where they belong it would be nice if they can fill their given role without mids full of command processors and lows full of co-procs. Let them tank like a Command Ship and get doomsday'd like command ships. -Selnix
Why? I for one believe the T2 ships which require more training by the way, should be better at their intended roles than a T3 or Faction cruiser. ISK should not be a substitute for skill points.- Fellraven
By your reasoning a Kronos should perform better than a Vindicator, a Vagabond should perform better than a Cynabal and a Keres should be able to stomp all over a Firetail. Just because a ship requires a different skill set does not mean it should necessarily be superior. There has to be a reason for people to want to commit their shiny expensive toys to a fight and a perceived advantage that you can gain from that ship is the only reason aside from Epeen that we don't all fly T1 insured BCs and BS in blobs of 3-500........
Guess I forgot what fleet mentality you subscribed to for a minute there.
And there has to be a reason to train all those skill necessary to fly T2. To re-quote you "There has to be a reason for people to want to commit their shiny expensive toys to a fight and a perceived advantage that you can gain from that ship is the only reason aside from Epeen"
So why then should it be unprobable as that would appear to defeat your own argument. As it stands now T2 ship have more than doubled in price due to CCP changes, in addition faction ships and T3 are getting better bonuses.
Yes people are flying Dramiels and Cynabals instead of Crows and Vagabonds. In my opinion they gap between Faction and T2 should be smaller if indeed there should be one at all. As for T3 well they are a joke, instead of being jack of all trades they are masters of all trades and this seems just a tad overpowered to me. Sure they cost a lot more and in many configurations (excluding, Covert Ops Nullified and Unprobable)you stand top lose a lot but for my money they are too flexible and can perform too many roles better than other ships.
They are after all cruisers and they can have a better tanks than a BS, can be faster than a vaga, can bet a specialist prober, can warp through bubbles, can have a **** ton of DPS, and you want then to be infinitely better than a Commandship too. Yes I know you have to use different sub-systems for each set-up but it's still way overpowered for the skills requirement.
|
Fiberton
StarFleet Enterprises -Mostly Harmless-
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 15:21:00 -
[2130]
Yea they are quite terrible at that. They also are terrible at mechanics spelled out directly. Look at Super Carriers.
" Immune to all forms of Electronic Warfare "
Yet You can ECM burst a SC and break its lock. With about 7 of them keep it from ever locking. /Ship Equipment/ Electronic Warfare / ECM Bursts
What is so complicated about " ALL FORMS "
So CCP WTF does ALL mean to you ?
Just saying.
Originally by: Glyken Touchon
When it comes to any mechanic/rule, use of words like "except" and "unless" should be minimised to avoid complication, especially any ones that affect newer players.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 75 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |