Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Paz Heiwa
New Order Logistics CODE.
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 23:38:00 -
[121] - Quote
Baneken wrote:Gotta love all the pirate QQ in this thread over being forced to bring a tad more people then usual to gank an orca. This change should somewhat increase survivability for industrial ships and PvP applications also sound interesting. Because we need another hisec buff. |
Astroniomix
Cryptic Meta-4
845
|
Posted - 2014.05.01 00:14:00 -
[122] - Quote
Paz Heiwa wrote:Baneken wrote:Gotta love all the pirate QQ in this thread over being forced to bring a tad more people then usual to gank an orca. This change should somewhat increase survivability for industrial ships and PvP applications also sound interesting. Because we need another hisec buff. Confirming that carebears tank their stuff in the first place. |
Lena Lazair
Khanid Irregulars
105
|
Posted - 2014.05.01 06:26:00 -
[123] - Quote
Paz Heiwa wrote:Because we need another hisec buff.
You are straying dangerously far from the code. The code does not say that hisec players should not be given options to make their play safer. It merely says they should be punished for NOT CHOOSING TO USE those options.
You should be welcoming this addition with open arms because it gives code-compliant miners a chance to further demonstrate just how far they've come from their bot-aspirant beginnings. |
Kosetzu
S1lver Flame
109
|
Posted - 2014.05.01 12:36:00 -
[124] - Quote
Bait hull tanked Navy Mega... mmmmm |
Valterra Craven
215
|
Posted - 2014.05.01 16:04:00 -
[125] - Quote
Fozie, what are the chances that this becomes a medium change and you add leadership skills and t1 and t2 links to the list of hull additions? Also add a bonus 3% leadership for all the battle cruisers for Hull tanks... You can even leave out the implant to see how things shake out first...
I'd love to actually have a more viable way to "tank" freighters and make it more expensive for goons to gank them... |
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
110
|
Posted - 2014.05.01 18:59:00 -
[126] - Quote
I have a better solution.
Why not create a rigging system for each Slot Section with a generalized slot selection for each ship?
The total number of modules slots would determine the total number of rig slots for that section of modules.
Take for example the Procurer
1 x high slot 4 x medium slots 2 x low slots
The new rigging system would have the following rig slots for each module section.
1 x high slot - zero rig slots 4 x medium slots - 2 rig slots for medium slot related modules - 100 calibration points per rig slot 2x low slots - 1 rig slot for low slot related modules - 100 calibration points
plus two general use rig slots in the normal location
Using the general rig slots would just require learning the associated Rig Skills. But with the Module Section Specific Rig Slot you have to learn the same rig skills to level five.
The Module Section Specific Rig Slots could be used to add additional T1 or T2 rigs as well as from what I am reading about could possibly be the inception of Factional based rigs which could only be used in the Module Section Specific Rig Slots.
|
Andy Koraka
PonyWaffe I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
32
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 01:21:00 -
[127] - Quote
This is a pretty harsh stealth-nerf to suicide ganking. Considering the 60% omni resist from a DCU II is a lot higher than the 30/47 therm/kin T1 shield resists, and the 3x Hull rigs net you the same raw Hull HP that 3x CDFE do, that's no small EHP buff. Especially when the T1 barges along with their new hull tank, still have a midslot (or two) for an Adaptive Invulnurability Field II.
A lot of ships that were marginal for a well skilled T2 catalyst to solo are going to always need a second ship. Actually, with the new Hull rigs a pair of T2 catas in a .5 system probably couldn't take down a Retriever using a DCU II/Adaptive Invuln II unless they had perfect gunnery sklils and timed their shots perfectly. |
Violette Tenebris
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 07:29:00 -
[128] - Quote
Will These have stacking penalties (as the reinforced bulkheads do not)
as this could get pretty practical on say some of the navy ships with their raised ehp values/bulkheads not costing nearly as much fitting room (IE BIGGER Guns) as their armor counterparts.
|
Lena Lazair
Khanid Irregulars
110
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 09:10:00 -
[129] - Quote
Andy Koraka wrote:A lot of ships that were marginal for a well skilled T2 catalyst to solo are going to always need a second ship. Actually, with the new Hull rigs a pair of T2 catas in a .5 system probably couldn't take down a Retriever using a DCU II/Adaptive Invuln II unless they had perfect gunnery sklils and timed their shots perfectly.
If I fit a ship specifically to resist suicide ganking at the expense of all other possible advantages (losing a low slot and all my rigs), then I SHOULD be hard to gank. I don't get why this is unfair or a nerf to ganking. It's like people complaining that warp core stabs force you to bring more than one scrambler. Yeah, gee, ya think?
HTFU, this is EVE. Find a target from the 95% of players who won't bother to fit against suicide ganking and will never use these rigs anyway. Or make some friends and bring more cats. Geez... |
Sipphakta en Gravonere
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
553
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 16:26:00 -
[130] - Quote
Lena Lazair wrote:HTFU, this is EVE. Find a target from the 95% of players who won't bother to fit against suicide ganking and will never use these rigs anyway. Or make some friends and bring more cats. Geez...
No-one said it was gonna be impossible to suicide gank. But nonetheless, this is a buff to Orcas/Industrials/Miners and another nerf to suicide ganking. |
|
Malcolm Malicious
Malware Detected Brave Collective
52
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 18:34:00 -
[131] - Quote
Finally, my hull tankers will be semi viable :D |
Powers Sa
1103
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 19:00:00 -
[132] - Quote
Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice. lol |
Victor Dathar
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
302
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 19:04:00 -
[133] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
Nom nom nom goonie tears ^^^ lol that post is so bad you should get back 2 GBS m8 o7 |
Burneddi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
54
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 19:21:00 -
[134] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice. This must be done, especially so if they aren't going to adjust freighter base cargo holds. |
El Space Mariachi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
70
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 19:22:00 -
[135] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
powers may be a goonNOOB but he is correct. Compromise is a cornerstone of Eve. . |
Anslo
Scope Works
4954
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 19:56:00 -
[136] - Quote
El Space Mariachi wrote:Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice. powers may be a goonNOOB but he is correct. Compromise is a cornerstone of Eve.
HTFU
|
Oleg Lemmont
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 19:58:00 -
[137] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
|
The Slayer
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
103
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 19:58:00 -
[138] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
Adapt you goonie scumbag. |
The Slayer
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
103
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 19:59:00 -
[139] - Quote
The Slayer wrote:
Adapt you goonie scumbag.
wrong account sorry disregard
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7216
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 19:59:00 -
[140] - Quote
that doesn't mean what you think it means Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division. |
|
Scout Esterhazy
Lucid Dreamers Get Off My Lawn
13
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:00:00 -
[141] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
I support this product and or service
+1 |
Merlin Sotken
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:01:00 -
[142] - Quote
Anslo wrote:El Space Mariachi wrote:Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice. powers may be a goonNOOB but he is correct. Compromise is a cornerstone of Eve. HTFU
spoken like a true pubby |
michael chasseur
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
53
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:02:00 -
[143] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
rigs already have drawbacks, why should they change them just to make MiniLuv happy? |
Ogast
Zebra Corp Gentlemen's Agreement
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:02:00 -
[144] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
|
Batzi Butzi
Lumberjack Industries
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:04:00 -
[145] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
|
Zadus Rejan
Kernel of War Goonswarm Federation
28
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:04:00 -
[146] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
|
michael chasseur
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
53
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:06:00 -
[147] - Quote
Merlin Sotken wrote:Anslo wrote:El Space Mariachi wrote:Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice. powers may be a goonNOOB but he is correct. Compromise is a cornerstone of Eve. HTFU spoken like a true pubby
:cripes: |
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
76
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:06:00 -
[148] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:Ok, so these confirm that there will be T2 freighters, and that they will have rig slots, but possibly no mod slots.
close enough ;)
|
Subhelios
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:07:00 -
[149] - Quote
Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice.
As a fellow member of the Space Mohawk Crew (Miniluv membership notwithstanding) I am required to endorse this post and idea. |
Trish Tokila
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 20:07:00 -
[150] - Quote
michael chasseur wrote:Powers Sa wrote:Can you adjust the HULL Rig penalties to add a reduction to cargo for choosing to fit tank? This would force the player to choose between tank or cargo, and making it a real choice with drawbacks either way. The cargo rigs should reduce hull, and the hull rigs should reduce cargo. This would be the best balance and reinforce the choices and roles the players will use these ships for.
Players frequently moving higher value will have to move less but be safer. Players moving low value but high volume will be less of a valuable target, but accepting risk with the fitting choice. rigs already have drawbacks, why should they change them just to make MiniLuv happy?
Because currently the drawback is a CPU penalty -- which is not a drawback on a ship that needs exactly 0 CPU |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |