Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Juvir
Omega Nebula BattleWorks Requiem Eternal
42
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 15:23:20 -
[301] - Quote
O2 jayjay wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:Juvir wrote:If you re-read, that was a response to what CCP said, not you. [quote=O2 jayjay]100m for fighters? Lol why? Well are you going to increase a T3 destroyer sig? I dont get why you people make these random changes. It wasnt that long ago eve only had 13000-20000 active subs. Due to Really bad nerfs that the player base was against. Let thing be and prosper by not pissing us off. Maybe we can hit 100k online one day. Lastly for the rorq change. Makes sense a HS incursion runner can make 34mil every 9 mins in a bil isk ship with very little risk involved. But shame on the null guy for spending 9 bil in a rorq and having other players on standbyi in multi bil isk ships to save him. Not one does he have to worry about hotdrops, the XL WH that housing 100man t3 crusier gang with logi just randomly spawned in his system. Now he is getting neefed to making what HS incursion runners make. Risk vs Reward factor makes sense........Not. Um... Eve hasn't had 20,000 subs since like early 2004. I think you may be confusing subs with average PCU, and even that hasn't been that low on average since about 2006. Also those incursion numbers are, um, ridiculous. No one runs sustained numbers like that, and certainly not with 1b fits. Carrier ratting in null makes almost twice the sustained ISK of Incursions and requires nothing more than yourself and a system to fly in. No waiting for fleets and less overall risk of losing your ship due to someone else's screwup. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
Early 2004 is incorrect if you look at the graph there... peak PCU was just barely 12k as it rolled into 2005 according to that link. It has breached 60k multiple times between 2010-2014, and has only broken 50k once since then.
|
Juvir
Omega Nebula BattleWorks Requiem Eternal
42
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 15:30:57 -
[302] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:So what was the fuking point of collecting feedback (which was fairly unanimous, a pair of trolls aside), if this change still goes in as it is? Why do you care since you won't be able to use your carrier with your walls of bubbles being nerfed?
Don't need walls of bubbles to carrier rat safely, just a good intel network. |
Juvir
Omega Nebula BattleWorks Requiem Eternal
42
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 15:33:17 -
[303] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Juvir wrote:If you re-read, that was a response to what CCP said, not you. Yes? And? Doesn't make him any less wrong.
It not only makes him less wrong, it makes you more wrong. You responded to what he said as if it was directed AT you, and it was unrelated to you entirely. It shows you're not reading to understand what a person is saying, but to react. Try slowing down and reading what is actually being said, instead of skimming and flaming. |
Jason Richter
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
7
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 15:49:55 -
[304] - Quote
Considering in Sanctums I've had issues with 3-4 LR FB's getting volleyed off field before their MJD could spool up, this change will be an undesired one. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3180
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 15:53:04 -
[305] - Quote
Juvir wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:So what was the fuking point of collecting feedback (which was fairly unanimous, a pair of trolls aside), if this change still goes in as it is? Why do you care since you won't be able to use your carrier with your walls of bubbles being nerfed? Don't need walls of bubbles to carrier rat safely, just a good intel network.
There is a reason why I said that to this player. |
Vinch Vondrichnov
Drama Sutra Incorporated.
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 16:04:32 -
[306] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:So what was the fuking point of collecting feedback (which was fairly unanimous, a pair of trolls aside), if this change still goes in as it is?
Mongs don't matter
Logan Jakal wrote:Yeah, because fighters having the radius of a cruiser is totally legit.
Because fighters having a smaller sig than heavy drones was totally legit ? Learn how this game works, thanks. |
Logan Jakal
Blue Sun. DARKNESS.
14
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 16:12:42 -
[307] - Quote
Juvir wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:So what was the fuking point of collecting feedback (which was fairly unanimous, a pair of trolls aside), if this change still goes in as it is? Why do you care since you won't be able to use your carrier with your walls of bubbles being nerfed? Don't need walls of bubbles to carrier rat safely, just a good intel network.
Actually, the only thing you need to Carrier rat safely is not being ******** AF. |
Logan Jakal
Blue Sun. DARKNESS.
14
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 16:15:09 -
[308] - Quote
Vinch Vondrichnov wrote:Logan Jakal wrote:Yeah, because fighters having the radius of a cruiser is totally legit. Because fighters having a smaller sig than heavy drones was totally legit ? Learn how this game works, thanks.
Seems legit coming from a high-sec scrub.
|
Vinch Vondrichnov
Drama Sutra Incorporated.
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 16:18:58 -
[309] - Quote
Logan Jakal wrote:Vinch Vondrichnov wrote:Logan Jakal wrote:Yeah, because fighters having the radius of a cruiser is totally legit. Because fighters having a smaller sig than heavy drones was totally legit ? Learn how this game works, thanks. Seems legit coming from a high-sec scrub.
You'r a piece **** inside a trash corp being itself inside of one of the most shittiest ally, check your smack privilege mate.
nvm, u'r flying in inties fleets, u'r elite. |
Logan Jakal
Blue Sun. DARKNESS.
15
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 16:56:44 -
[310] - Quote
Vinch Vondrichnov wrote:Logan Jakal wrote:Vinch Vondrichnov wrote:Logan Jakal wrote:Yeah, because fighters having the radius of a cruiser is totally legit. Because fighters having a smaller sig than heavy drones was totally legit ? Learn how this game works, thanks. Seems legit coming from a high-sec scrub. You'r a piece **** inside a trash corp being itself inside of one of the most shittiest ally, check your smack privilege mate. nvm, u'r flying in inties fleets, u'r elite.
lol yeah I fly inties
https://puu.sh/uCSzU/4b88a30e12.jpg |
|
Vinch Vondrichnov
Drama Sutra Incorporated.
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 16:59:23 -
[311] - Quote
Logan Jakal wrote:Vinch Vondrichnov wrote:Logan Jakal wrote:Vinch Vondrichnov wrote:Logan Jakal wrote:Yeah, because fighters having the radius of a cruiser is totally legit. Because fighters having a smaller sig than heavy drones was totally legit ? Learn how this game works, thanks. Seems legit coming from a high-sec scrub. You'r a piece **** inside a trash corp being itself inside of one of the most shittiest ally, check your smack privilege mate. nvm, u'r flying in inties fleets, u'r elite. lol yeah I fly inties https://puu.sh/uCSzU/4b88a30e12.jpg
Gz on being a glorified F1 pusher, now gtfo and learn to play this game. |
Sandra Isu
Space Cavalry Regiment
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 16:59:37 -
[312] - Quote
I'm sad because another nerf comming to carriers to the point of considering giving up the game for now. But not because nerf itself but because of how it was done. No UI improvement so we can see how much hp fighter has, no fix for npc aggro so they won't jump one squadron at once instead of spreading it to all of them. Bad fighter mechanics like no assist/guard, standing still after attack, no auto aggro etc. This is not how things should be done.
And funniest thing is that because my carrier loses too many fighters on sisi (lost two on last haven wave and having 3x drone hp rigs didnt helped) I was thinking that maybe I will take him for some pvp since I no longer need it. But guess what. I remembered why I was not getting it for pvp earlier - because he had to poor dps against smaller ships and it was too easy to kill/counter fighters ... So what should I do with it now?
And if you think that I am overreacting, then I have to tell you that when I lost internet connection and relogged fast I lost already 6 t2 fighters and it hurts. I don't even want to know how many I will lose next time after this change.
Btw is there any chance to have capital and fighter skills refunded? Because as I understand this change is not going to be postponed. |
Juvir
Omega Nebula BattleWorks Requiem Eternal
42
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 16:59:38 -
[313] - Quote
Vinch Vondrichnov wrote:Orca Platypus wrote:So what was the fuking point of collecting feedback (which was fairly unanimous, a pair of trolls aside), if this change still goes in as it is? Mongs don't matter Logan Jakal wrote:Yeah, because fighters having the radius of a cruiser is totally legit. Because fighters having a smaller sig than heavy drones was totally legit ? Learn how this game works, thanks.
Because not having the resists or 3 layers of HP of a heavy drone is totally legit. EHP on a heavy drone > a fighter, and it costs much less. Doesn't matter if it's T1 or T2. Play the game, thanks. |
Logan Jakal
Blue Sun. DARKNESS.
15
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 17:01:09 -
[314] - Quote
Vinch Vondrichnov wrote:[Gz on being a glorified F1 pusher, now gtfo and learn to play this game.
Jesus christ, even Liberals are not as salty as you lol |
Vinch Vondrichnov
Drama Sutra Incorporated.
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 17:05:46 -
[315] - Quote
Logan Jakal wrote:Vinch Vondrichnov wrote:[Gz on being a glorified F1 pusher, now gtfo and learn to play this game. Jesus christ, even Liberals are not as salty as you lol
You'r the one whining because of a fighter sig increase, get real. |
Logan Jakal
Blue Sun. DARKNESS.
15
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 17:06:31 -
[316] - Quote
Vinch Vondrichnov wrote:Logan Jakal wrote:Vinch Vondrichnov wrote:[Gz on being a glorified F1 pusher, now gtfo and learn to play this game. Jesus christ, even Liberals are not as salty as you lol You'r the one whining because of a fighter sig increase, get real.
I didn't whine, I just pointed something that is totally stupid, and you acted like a crazy sas. Take a chill pill. |
Cade Windstalker
1057
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 17:12:20 -
[317] - Quote
Orca Platypus wrote:So what was the ****ing point of collecting feedback (which was fairly unanimous, a pair of trolls aside), if this change still goes in as it is?
Lets see, where to start with this one...
First off, a few dozen people on the forums is hardly any kind of unanimous feedback. If you look back through the older threads the feedback is almost always majority negative against whatever change is being made.
The Marauders thread is a pretty good example of this, because it got a huge amount of attention and CCP actually changed their plan based on the huge amount of negative feedback they were receiving. Then they got even *more* negative feedback from people who liked their first plan more, so they swapped back to a slightly tweaked version of V1 of the Marauder rework. Taking the contents of one of these threads as 'proof' of anything is ridiculous.
Beyond that the arguments against this change, and most changes really, have amounted to 'OMG no nerf, this is terrible and unjustified and shouldn't be done! No!' which is... not a counter argument, or even an argument really, it's just emotional feedback. Of course people don't like it when things are nerfed, that's a given. If you or anyone else wants to change CCP's mind or direction with this or any other change they need to present a reasoned and well supported argument.
So far you and most of the rest of the people in this thread A. haven't actually done any testing and B. haven't provided any kind of actual proof, you're just making a bunch of assumption, taking it as given that those assumptions are correct, and then arguing from there. That's not going to convince anyone who isn't already on your side.
I once again invite anyone and everyone interested in changing CCP's mind to take a look at this awesome post by CCP Greyscale on what makes a good argument.
Juvir wrote:It not only makes him less wrong, it makes you more wrong. You responded to what he said as if it was directed AT you, and it was unrelated to you entirely. It shows you're not reading to understand what a person is saying, but to react. Try slowing down and reading what is actually being said, instead of skimming and flaming.
While I don't agree entirely with everything he is saying due to the way he is saying it, it doesn't help to provoke a person either. The idea here is for feedback, and rage posts are generally ignored by CCP anyway. There's no need to stoke the fire and make matters worse.
Um... no, I didn't? I responded to what he said, to CCP Larrikin, as if he said it to CCP Larrikin.
"That is literally not what he said... Lol" <- emphasis mine
Also when I said he was wrong I was referring to factually wrong. What he said was, quite blatantly, factually incorrect hyperbole.
As to the rest of it, yes I was being a bit of an ***. I shouldn't have responded to him. Fair cop on that.
Juvir wrote:Because not having the resists or 3 layers of HP of a heavy drone is totally legit. EHP on a heavy drone > a fighter, and it costs much less. Doesn't matter if it's T1 or T2. Play the game, thanks.
Yes, but functionally Fighters are much faster and harder to apply damage to than a Heavy Drone, so while Heavy Drones have more EHP Fighters still generally tank better. |
Vinch Vondrichnov
Drama Sutra Incorporated.
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 17:15:47 -
[318] - Quote
Sandra Isu wrote:I'm sad because another nerf comming to carriers to the point of considering giving up the game for now.
Good, i'm looking for a carrier pilot.
Sandra Isu wrote: And if you think that I am overreacting, then I have to tell you that when I lost internet connection and relogged fast I lost already 6 t2 fighters and it hurts. I don't even want to know how many I will lose next time after this change.
Don't lose internet connection ?
Sandra Isu wrote: Btw is there any chance to have capital and fighter skills refunded? Because as I understand this change is not going to be postponed.
See above. |
Juvir
Omega Nebula BattleWorks Requiem Eternal
42
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 18:30:14 -
[319] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Juvir wrote:Because not having the resists or 3 layers of HP of a heavy drone is totally legit. EHP on a heavy drone > a fighter, and it costs much less. Doesn't matter if it's T1 or T2. Play the game, thanks. Yes, but functionally Fighters are much faster and harder to apply damage to than a Heavy Drone, so while Heavy Drones have more EHP Fighters still generally tank better. That said, I am wondering if this isn't going to end up being a bit much. An EHP boost might be a good next step and at this point I'm half expecting it with the next round of Carrier tweaks, assuming we get one.
A lot of people are asking that very thing actually. Put out an EHP increase for fighters, better resists, "something" with this change. Rather than the hard bat then fixes, why not balance it before release? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3180
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 18:39:33 -
[320] - Quote
Juvir wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:Juvir wrote:Because not having the resists or 3 layers of HP of a heavy drone is totally legit. EHP on a heavy drone > a fighter, and it costs much less. Doesn't matter if it's T1 or T2. Play the game, thanks. Yes, but functionally Fighters are much faster and harder to apply damage to than a Heavy Drone, so while Heavy Drones have more EHP Fighters still generally tank better. That said, I am wondering if this isn't going to end up being a bit much. An EHP boost might be a good next step and at this point I'm half expecting it with the next round of Carrier tweaks, assuming we get one. A lot of people are asking that very thing actually. Put out an EHP increase for fighters, better resists, "something" with this change. Rather than the hard bat then fixes, why not balance it before release?
Just making them move after they kill something would solve most of it. They get wrecked when they come to a dead stop but people doing testing reported that if you keep them moving, the damage can be managed. Something along the line of auto-orbiting the wreck they just created would probably work.
|
|
Juvir
Omega Nebula BattleWorks Requiem Eternal
42
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 19:00:56 -
[321] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Juvir wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:Juvir wrote:Because not having the resists or 3 layers of HP of a heavy drone is totally legit. EHP on a heavy drone > a fighter, and it costs much less. Doesn't matter if it's T1 or T2. Play the game, thanks. Yes, but functionally Fighters are much faster and harder to apply damage to than a Heavy Drone, so while Heavy Drones have more EHP Fighters still generally tank better. That said, I am wondering if this isn't going to end up being a bit much. An EHP boost might be a good next step and at this point I'm half expecting it with the next round of Carrier tweaks, assuming we get one. A lot of people are asking that very thing actually. Put out an EHP increase for fighters, better resists, "something" with this change. Rather than the hard bat then fixes, why not balance it before release? Just making them move after they kill something would solve most of it. They get wrecked when they come to a dead stop but people doing testing reported that if you keep them moving, the damage can be managed. Something along the line of auto-orbiting the wreck they just created would probably work.
Agreed, fixing the broken mechanic at the same time would also work. Without any other changes, this current list as it stands just sucks. |
Father Manlove
Sheep Can Hear A Zipper From A Mile Away
10
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 04:08:41 -
[322] - Quote
Why even bother posting this thread when you obviously don't want any feedback and are gonna push it out after 2 weeks anyway? Seems like a waste of everyone's time. |
Syco Saisima
Vector Galactic Shadow Cartel
25
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 06:43:24 -
[323] - Quote
I usually try and come up with a paragraph or two on WHY i think something is bad. However i don't need to for this Fighter nerf as it is already blatantly obvious why it's bad if you actually carrier rat or do LvL 5 missions. Especially in Level 5 missions there is now NO WAY to mitigate damage and NOT lose 2-3 fighters in a mission MINIMUM. It is a bad and unwanted update by the people who actually pay your bills. Stop smoking crack and stop changing things that aren't broken. |
Archival1
Path of Now and Forever
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 08:00:02 -
[324] - Quote
Why not wait untill you change how fighters behave before putting in a patch that (in PvE) completely screws them up primarily because of the way the fighters currently behave. You have identified an issue, that they stop moving when they finish killing something, so why would you make a change that exploits that issue? Fighters stopping in a PvE site as they kill something is the primary reason me and everyone I know lose fighters, because they stop moving then get 1 volley'd by the whole site, increasing the sig radius just means they will get 1 shot even more often when this happens. |
GothicNightmare
Amazing Super Slackers Army of New Eden
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 09:26:18 -
[325] - Quote
I've read a lot of posts on this topic and I'm in agreement with most of them... this nerf is really really bad... Having an active cloaky camper in my system for a few days gave me ample time to watch some good youtube videos people have posted for pvp, and there seems to be a very common reaccurance on their videos... t he death speed of the fighters. Mainly the Sirens go first, and they pop like grapes. I've watched a few where they launch the fighters after repair/reload and the instant they come out frigs/cepters are already railing them before they've even pushed F1 to engage something and by the time they get on target a few fighters have already become space dust. In pvp all it takes is designating 1 person to watch for fighter launches and having them call it when they see it and that's pretty much it. Yes, fighters do heaps of damage, yes, fighters are pretty quick, but when that mwd comes on their sig blooms to hell and back and just makes them splat faster. As mentioned before any sort of ewar on them splatters them rapidly too... If you want to make them squishier... bring back the damage output pre-nerf right after the fighter squadron changes were implemented in game.
Now for PvE... I'm a carrier ratter myself and am one that has enjoyed rolling around in the isky goodness that is dead npc's. I'm also one that isn't able to financially sub outside of game so I am forced to rat to buy plexes, and at their ever increasing cost (yes i know they recently lowered a bit) it's a task all in itself to play the game to be able to play the game. At the current cost of fighters, if you bloom the sig to sizes somewhere between frigate and cruiser, the rat aggro on the fighters will add up fast. Example: 1 rock haven can yield 30mil if the spawns are all maxed sized (no faction no dread). If you lose 2 or 3 fighters at 13mil a pop, that haven only served to buy you another few fighters. Someone like myself (and I know quite a few others) will be quickly found to not playing anymore as that precious plex isk went entirely to fighter replacement.
I saw the comment about learning to work with/around the changes and adapt. Yes, this can be done, we can all rat in subcaps and get significantly smaller bounty ticks, we can all pvp in caracals and rifters so very little isk is ever spent... but this is taking the invested skillpoints (as has been mentioned by several) and putting a lot of people who like battleship class or larger ships (myself as one) and just putting it obsolete. After the T1 cruiser 'balances' were introduced making them a fair bit stronger than before people stopped using T2 ships. When T3Ds came out people went even cheaper pvp with those, and all these ships basically severely outclassed upper level ships causing them to fade out. Only time you see battleships anymore is in massive groups, only time you see battlecruisers anymore is 20+ with 3-6 logi (I'm probably exaggerating here but you see my point) Yes we adapt, but we adapt down into levels where we don't find it fun for us or our playstyles, we are forced into someone elses play style and just makes it dull for those who don't fancy the interceptor kite fleets or 0 f*cks given carcal blobs. If you spent all that time training up into a vessel that large, it just feels like the fun is sapped out when you're spent time in it is now solely gone into it's maintenance rather than it's fun or functionality.
I'm on board with the fighters don't need to sit idle after a target has been destroyed. If your rocket volleys are on cooldown and so are the gun cycles, they just sit there and take it in the face until the guns are free to activate on a new target... making them move would be nice. Decrease the size of support fighters if you insist on making them even easier to kill, knowing the 1 useful support fighter you have is going to constantly be wasted would be nice to carry a few extras. Seriously rethink the sig change, even if you increase the sig radius of all the fighters, don't increase it so much, you're rendering them dead before they've even locked a target. If you insist they have to be easier to hit, at least give them a fighting chance with some more EHP since as it stands the only ehp bonuses are from rigs or thanatos/nyx, and I don't think everyone wants to be forced to train those just to make their drones live 1 second longer. maybe even give the ship's bonuses to the fighters, since amarr and caldari don't get damage buffs like minmatar and gallente do, why not pass down the ship bonuses like the amarr pass down armor resists, caldari pass down shield resists, all supers pass down the ewar resistance so their fighters/bombers stand a bit of a chance.
CCP you always talk about risk vs. reward and/or balancing... take a good hard look at this proposed change, there is no reward. You're always looking for the give and take, well with this it's all take with no give. If you must nerf the hell out of the fighters, give something back to balance the reasoning. |
Jan Aubaris
BAND of MAGNUS CeskoSlovenska Aliance
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 11:45:30 -
[326] - Quote
I have a dream, to build my own thanatos, from resources that I will mine in our home WH, and with mine beautiful thany, build with my own hands a I could sometimes run some anoms in our static. We lived in nice C6->C5, I start mining, few months later we were evicted. OK. New WH, C6->C5, I start mining again, the ore is stacking up, I was happy. Then nerf comes, it was unpleasant, but OK, I could live with that. My mining goes well, I have enough Arkonor, Bistot, Crokite, so I ask my corpmates to reproces them into minerals and slowly start looking for BPCs. After some time, the ccp had great idea to push peaple living in WHs out of their home WH and anomalies stop showing up in holes where somebody lives. This slowly turns C6s and C5s into nearly wasteland, so we were bored from unsufficient PvP, our home C6 run out of anomalies and our C5static simply doesnt have enough ISKs for all of us. The decision was made and we moved to C6->C6. C6 anomaly is harder than C5, but I still had a chance with more expensive fit. My mining operations goes well and after several months I have enough Dark Ochre and Gneiss, so next reprocessing round for those two and compresing mined Scordite and Veldspar, half m3 of required ore was behind me, so I`m buying BPCs for thany and fighters. Then new mechanics was introduced, which freeze my smile and I start to doubt if this is worth of my work. But I slowly continue in mining, because hey, it wil be my thany, made by myself and I already have more than half required materials and it still should be doable. Then because of some consecutive events and decisions and because we were hungry for PvP, we decide to move to C4 with C6, C4 static and I stopped mining, I dont want my beautiful thany stuck in one place. But I still had hope, that we could move someday into C6/C5 and I still have that hope. But with this change, I dont believe I have chance to make some anomalies profitable. I know you have in your citadel trailer mention about wrecking their dreams, but I thought it was aimed to players, not developers... |
Sandra Isu
Space Cavalry Regiment
4
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 11:46:10 -
[327] - Quote
You can make fighters move while waiting for weapons to exit cooldown by clicking orbit on anything, even next target but it is even more clicking that is already too much on a carrier. The problem is that moving now don't help much anyway.
I have simple solution how to fix current fighter mechanic. All actions done to fighters should be divided by fighter amount. If you web squadron, it shoudl be effective 1/x where x is the current amount of fighters. The same should be with all ewar and even damage done to compensate that only one fighter in the squadron is taking damage. Then you can raise sig as it is needed to be. |
ApolloF117 HUN
Angels and Demons Inc. Mordus Angels
51
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 11:54:16 -
[328] - Quote
so why does a fighter that is 38m long have 100m sig radios while a 280m long destroyer has 60m? |
Dictateur Imperator
Ab origine fidelis Get Off My Lawn
37
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 13:00:53 -
[329] - Quote
In fact "solution" is to order to you're fighter to orbit an item when they end to kill.
Problem : BAd connexion with a suddently ping => bye to you're fighter. You can't play with you're 2 hand? You will have not time to make they orbit and fire before loose one.
It"s not a problem of the nerf, it become a problem of game accessibility.
So true question is : Why CCP decide to take sanction against player with the badest connexion ? Why CCP decide to destroy content ?(less carrier in space, less people who farm, less newbro who salvage, less target for roammer ... less content). Why CCP decide to make decision to take sanction against people who can't use 2 hand to play?
CCP don't reed here, maybe after update contact press of you're country and explain to they a game company take sanction against people in fonction of they're connexion/health... And see how many time before CCP decide to answer by allow to fighter to orbit wreck when they kill and not to stop.
|
AgentMaster
Platinum Octopus Infernal Octopus
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 15:35:19 -
[330] - Quote
Why CCP lure us that this is a discussion? They just declare what they mind and what will do. Never change that no matter how many pages we will write. Not shure that they even read it,,,
Blessed is the man who has nothing to say and remain silent yet!!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |