EVE Search - The nano problem

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

Game Development Forum

The nano problem

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 :: one page

Author	Topic
HEY LISTEN i swear this is true	Posted - 2008.04.09 00:07:00 - [241] Edited by: HEY LISTEN on 09/04/2008 00:08:56 Originally by: Goumindong If they don't engage its not much of a problem, its when you land close on the same grid and there is no chance of engagement that is. Originally by: HEY LISTEN No not many kills but then nothing can stop gangs (even slow moving BS gangs ffs) from not engaging or running away if they think they are gonna lose, and that for a nano gang looking for kills is a loss, a fail and not great. Offensive nano gang getting no kills = fail Originally by: Goumindong No, that is a tie, it is neither a win[getting kills], or a loss[losing ships] So you web idea forces a tie as well bud, maybe they will just bring a uber nano blob like you say they will for the logistic mix gang and overwhelm you. Remember this when you claimed logistics would force a draw and they would bring a nano blob?. Originally by: Goumindong Other than combat not scaling the way you think it does? Or the fact that we wouldn't be able to get any kills anyway?.
Goumindong Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.09 00:13:00 - [242] Nah, it only forces a tie if the ships never end up on grid and close to each other. In that situation everything always counts as a tie If they blob you then they blob you, there isn't anything you can do about it. The problem is that you can't kill them Vote Goumindong for CSM
HEY LISTEN i swear this is true	Posted - 2008.04.09 00:24:00 - [243] Edited by: HEY LISTEN on 09/04/2008 00:25:35 Originally by: Goumindong Nah, it only forces a tie if the ships never end up on grid and close to each other. In that situation everything always counts as a tie If they blob you then they blob you, there isn't anything you can do about it. The problem is that you can't kill them In that case your idea sucks cos at least with the mixed fleet they will engage with eaqual numbers or even less and give you a shot at killing a few of them cos winning or losing depends on the skill of the gangs as a better/smarter team. While your silly web idea will just make them never engage unless they have much greater numbers, it encourages blobbing and sucks.
Goumindong Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.09 00:30:00 - [244] No, they could come in a heavy gang instead if they couldn't get forces for a fast gang to engage you. With the current mechanics since you cant kill the nano gang you have only one other option, get a bigger nano-gang. That promotes blobbing. Vote Goumindong for CSM
HEY LISTEN i swear this is true	Posted - 2008.04.09 00:43:00 - [245] Originally by: Goumindong No, they could come in a heavy gang instead if they couldn't get forces for a fast gang to engage you. With the current mechanics since you cant kill the nano gang you have only one other option, get a bigger nano-gang. That promotes blobbing. Rubbish ive told you and so have others how a mixed gang can out fight them a mixed fleet will allow them to engage and have a good chance of killing some of them or them you depending on the sjkill of the gangs. While your idea will force them to blob with either nano or heavy ships in a skilless optimal range numbers game. So if you fly a logistic gang you claim they will just bring a nano blob but now its a "if" they "cannot" find enough nano ships to blob with, cos its your silly idea under debate. Sori bud but you have no idea about how true high xp pvpers work cos they never want to get into a " both sides sit at optimal plugging away until one side runs out of ships fight". They want gang skills and piloting skills to be the deciding factor in a fight bud trust me i had a 3 vs 3 fight the other day that lasted over 5 mins and in the end neither side took losses but its was great and both sides convo'd each other about how great it was. That sort of enjoyment it seems is beyond you.
Goumindong Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.09 00:54:00 - [246] Originally by: HEY LISTEN ... Wait, so right now a nano gang will die because the mixed fleet will kill them and follow them and kill them. But if you increase the range of webs, the nano gang will instead blob them and kill the mixed gang? how in the world does this make sense? If the mixed gang is killing the targets how does making them better make it easier for the targets to leave? Vote Goumindong for CSM
HEY LISTEN i swear this is true	Posted - 2008.04.09 01:14:00 - [247] Edited by: HEY LISTEN on 09/04/2008 01:18:06 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: HEY LISTEN ... Wait, so right now a nano gang will die because the mixed fleet will kill them and follow them and kill them. But if you increase the range of webs, the nano gang will instead blob them and kill the mixed gang? Where do i claim any of that, are you insane, can you read???.
San Rintu Asshats and Alcoholics Notoriety Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.09 01:56:00 - [248] The problem here has already been addressed. There needs to be no change to webs, neuts or whatever. However some ships are simply too fast. The three key ships we see in nano gangs dps wise are probably Vagabonds, Zealots and Ishtars. This is setting aside recons. I place no minni ship in this assessment. The Vaga is fast but yet has trouble hitting ships unless if pulses its mwd. The Zealot has lesser trouble hitting but either must sacrifice damage for range or run the risk of a close to web range orbit. Now it has a greater PG output and another turret, its speed is a little high. The key broken 'nano' ship is the Ishtar. A ship which can outpace other HAC's designed for speed, has a drone bay enabling it to fight as well as a dominix and also fight as a proxy with drone control augs. I still cannot foresee how something of a vexor hull can deploy 5 Heavy Drones when the Myrmidon can no longer. Minmatar ships are meant to be fast, so leave them that way. Vaga's are a pain to fit, a good one is not cap stable and generally their dps does not stand up to the ridiculous numbers you can pull out of a Zealot or primarily an Ishtar.
HEY LISTEN i swear this is true	Posted - 2008.04.09 02:07:00 - [249] Originally by: San Rintu The problem here has already been addressed. There needs to be no change to webs, neuts or whatever. However some ships are simply too fast. The three key ships we see in nano gangs dps wise are probably Vagabonds, Zealots and Ishtars. This is setting aside recons. I place no minni ship in this assessment. The Vaga is fast but yet has trouble hitting ships unless if pulses its mwd. The Zealot has lesser trouble hitting but either must sacrifice damage for range or run the risk of a close to web range orbit. Now it has a greater PG output and another turret, its speed is a little high. The key broken 'nano' ship is the Ishtar. A ship which can outpace other HAC's designed for speed, has a drone bay enabling it to fight as well as a dominix and also fight as a proxy with drone control augs. I still cannot foresee how something of a vexor hull can deploy 5 Heavy Drones when the Myrmidon can no longer. Minmatar ships are meant to be fast, so leave them that way. Vaga's are a pain to fit, a good one is not cap stable and generally their dps does not stand up to the ridiculous numbers you can pull out of a Zealot or primarily an Ishtar. A single SB in your gang can reduce said ishtar to a useless green lump, ok a reasonably fast useless green lump but useless all the same. Can you explain why ppl do not fit correctly for combat and then claim the game is broken when the answer is quite simple?.
Atomos Darksun Infortunatus Eventus	Posted - 2008.04.09 02:32:00 - [250] Originally by: Ghengis Gone 10 gang-fit hacs/speed ships vs 10 gang-fit battleships, who will win? The nano ships will just run away, which really doesn't count as a win for the battleships. Originally by: Amoxin My vent is talking to me in a devil voice... Atomos' Guide to Forum Flaming

HEY LISTEN i swear this is true	Posted - 2008.04.09 02:46:00 - [251] Edited by: HEY LISTEN on 09/04/2008 02:52:42 Originally by: Atomos Darksun Originally by: Ghengis Gone 10 gang-fit hacs/speed ships vs 10 gang-fit battleships, who will win? The nano ships will just run away, which really doesn't count as a win for the battleships. Actually the nano will own unless they suck, as BS are not great at working without support. BUT 10 Nano vs 10 mixed of 2-3 logistics, 3 TI fitted ravens, 4ewar/tackle = A very fun and interesting fight proly decided by the better skilled gang (as in teamwork and xp not sp).
Matrixcvd Caldari Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.04.09 19:07:00 - [252] Originally by: San Rintu Minmatar ships are meant to be fast, so leave them that way. Vaga's are a pain to fit, a good one is not cap stable and generally their dps does not stand up to the ridiculous numbers you can pull out of a Zealot or primarily an Ishtar. if you nerf all other HACs, all you will see is vaga's, right now there is a nice balance of nanohac's, with vagas king of speed but by about 2-3k/s. Ishtars are fast but there damage is slow, if you cant get away from ogre II's you can blow them up, if you can't do either, you deserve to die. Don't start hating on Zealots, they are nice and used now iwth the buff they received, they just got out of the dark pre-buff days and now you want to screw them over? Speed is fine, dumb people flying interent space ships and crying when they die is not
MirrorGod Heretic Army DeStInY.	Posted - 2008.04.09 19:59:00 - [253] There is nothing wrong with nanos. Shut up. Recruitment: [ANTI]
Ulstan	Posted - 2008.04.09 20:26:00 - [254] Nanos are the new WCS. Actually, they're even better than the old WCS, because filling your slots with WCS meant no tank, but filling your slots with propulsion mods gives you a great tank. All the arguments that applied to nerfing WCS, apply to nanos.
Phoibos Minmatar North Face Force	Posted - 2008.04.09 20:56:00 - [255] Edited by: Phoibos on 09/04/2008 20:58:08 Nanos are the new WCS. Actually, they're even better than the old WCS, because filling your slots with WCS meant no tank, but filling your slots with propulsion mods gives you a great tank. All the arguments that applied to nerfing WCS, apply to nanos I'm surprised that you even try to compare NANOS and WCS. Embarrassing for yourself above all. Shows how out of touch people really are when it comes to the pvp-part of the game. Statements like this kill the discussion before it started, Only thing you can expect from a text like this is flame and we really dont need more of that here. I don't mean to be rude but its just sad...
Zhula Guixgrixks Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Star Buccaneers	Posted - 2008.04.10 16:46:00 - [256] Edited by: Zhula Guixgrixks on 10/04/2008 16:53:30 Two examples of killing a nano ship with relative weak forces: Some days ago a corp mate engaged a Ishtar in his Ishkur - he is always doing such things :) -, he managed to web this HAC long enough till a Huginn and 2 Rifters arrived. Ishkur poped but we also killed this nano-fitted Ishtar. The funny thing was, those 2 Rifters did most of dmg (Huginn did only 800HP). Also some ECM drones from Huginn were involved. You can say, ok he was jammed & webbed. But trusting on ECM drones while sitting in a Rifter isn't a feeling wich I could describe as "safe". Some months ago I was living in Esoteria where Stain Empire gangs notoriously gank everything. Our corp is small and we do not have numbers to counterblob a med size SE gang. We got intel on one of enemies gangs roaming some 10-15 jumps from us. SE gang was using a Vaga as forward scout. I anchored a small bubble on their path. A corpmate was sitting in a Brutix aligned towards our bubble. After this I jumped to neighbour system and waited for incoming Vaga near outgoing gate. As soon as directional scanner detected our target, I jumped and aligned towards outgoing gate of "prepared system". After enemy pilot decloaked, I warped directly to our trap. So did our prey. We finished him before rest of SE blob arrived. I was flying a Osprey. I'm not claiming killing nanos is easy, but it is possible and you should not use a blob, it just scare them. I'm also sure that "hit & run" anoying many of pilots in Eve. It is some kind of disappointing when a fight feels unresolved. But thats a core of guerilla warfare. You have big guns, ships and numbers but you cannot catch them. Thats pretty frustrating, huh ;) ?? Ok, just kiding. Fly safe, use your brain, organize yourself, gather intel and tactics. Btw. I'm not flying nano-ships beside frigates and I'm not good in hunting them. I tried some semi-nano fittings with cheap T1 cruisers/BC.
Matrixcvd Caldari Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.04.10 18:21:00 - [257] Originally by: Ulstan Nanos are the new WCS. Actually, they're even better than the old WCS, because filling your slots with WCS meant no tank, but filling your slots with propulsion mods gives you a great tank. All the arguments that applied to nerfing WCS, apply to nanos. Did you plug nanos into EFT and get a full rack of WCS? That must have happened since, even the guy who programed EFT would know that NANO=WCS!?!?!?!?!! this is the way people complain about nano's 1. Its not balanced, interceptors are the smallest ships and should always be the fastest 2. YOU CANT RUN AWAY FROM ME, NO!!! I HAD TO GET LIKE 40 PEOPLE TO FIGHT 4 of YOU NOT FAIR 3. MY MISSILES WONT HIT, BUFF MISSILES 4. FALCONS+NANOS=IWIN OMG NO!!! I dont have the SP FOR THAT 5. I am gallentee why cant i fly falcons or nanos!?!?!? NOT FAIR NERF THAT 6. YOU HAVE IMPLANTS, YOU HAVE GANG BONUSES, YOU HAVE CLAYMORES IN GANG, YOU HAVE SNAKES!!!! NOO!!!!!!!, i mean come on, i just bought like 5 90GTC's for this char and carrier, how could i possibly lose it solocampin at a gate to a bunch of nano's, MY SHIP IS BIGGER THAN YOURS!!!!! 7. Gosh, drakes should beat vagas, i mean its a cruiser.. and the drake looks cool 8. Gosh, i cant wait like 6 months to train, i cant fly T2 boo hoo, its not fair 9. I am gonna hug the station like a small girl till you leave, its not fair 10. leave system i need to rat 11. Counters are more important than tactics 12. My ship should be able to perma shoot, tank, and out dps everything smaller than it 13. How can i press F1,F2,F3,F4,F5,F6 and not do any damage? I mean come on guys its not fair Sound familar? What I am waiting for is high sec ganking in nano's, wouldnt that just blow everyone's gasket, HighSec Ganking+Nanos= 20,000 Nubs jumping off the roofs of their houses not being able to handle the shear unfairness... i can only hope
deadmeet	Posted - 2008.04.11 11:28:00 - [258] Originally by: Matrixcvd Originally by: Ulstan Nanos are the new WCS. Actually, they're even better than the old WCS, because filling your slots with WCS meant no tank, but filling your slots with propulsion mods gives you a great tank. All the arguments that applied to nerfing WCS, apply to nanos. Did you plug nanos into EFT and get a full rack of WCS? That must have happened since, even the guy who programed EFT would know that NANO=WCS!?!?!?!?!! this is the way people complain about nano's 1. Its not balanced, interceptors are the smallest ships and should always be the fastest 2. YOU CANT RUN AWAY FROM ME, NO!!! I HAD TO GET LIKE 40 PEOPLE TO FIGHT 4 of YOU NOT FAIR 3. MY MISSILES WONT HIT, BUFF MISSILES 4. FALCONS+NANOS=IWIN OMG NO!!! I dont have the SP FOR THAT 5. I am gallentee why cant i fly falcons or nanos!?!?!? NOT FAIR NERF THAT 6. YOU HAVE IMPLANTS, YOU HAVE GANG BONUSES, YOU HAVE CLAYMORES IN GANG, YOU HAVE SNAKES!!!! NOO!!!!!!!, i mean come on, i just bought like 5 90GTC's for this char and carrier, how could i possibly lose it solocampin at a gate to a bunch of nano's, MY SHIP IS BIGGER THAN YOURS!!!!! 7. Gosh, drakes should beat vagas, i mean its a cruiser.. and the drake looks cool 8. Gosh, i cant wait like 6 months to train, i cant fly T2 boo hoo, its not fair 9. I am gonna hug the station like a small girl till you leave, its not fair 10. leave system i need to rat 11. Counters are more important than tactics 12. My ship should be able to perma shoot, tank, and out dps everything smaller than it 13. How can i press F1,F2,F3,F4,F5,F6 and not do any damage? I mean come on guys its not fair Sound familar? What I am waiting for is high sec ganking in nano's, wouldnt that just blow everyone's gasket, HighSec Ganking+Nanos= 20,000 Nubs jumping off the roofs of their houses not being able to handle the shear unfairness... i can only hope Lol, very funny and very true. In addition, people that cry to nerf nano don't understand how all the gameplay will be changer by that.. remove the MWD ? Ok what about frigate in PVP.... explode like pop corn ? impossible to fit several speed mod... Yeah, what about true nano ship like vaga..? I'm ok to say that some ships should not nano, because they have enough strong to be good without that, but removing the nano to a ship like the vaga would bring it to the death... I see one very good idea one day on that forum, it was to move the MWD and AB to low slot. - It would remove one slot for nano - It would reduce (a little) the big hole between armor tank and shield tank in PVP - It's more Role play (why all speed mod are low slow and not MWD and AB, its a non-sense) Whar about this idea ?
Taip Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.04.11 11:57:00 - [259] Well I've spent the best part of 4 years flying traditionally-tanked ships on other characters and piling hate on the speed-fits.. until recently that is. Having joined a corp/alliance that uses 'nanoships' extensively and now flying Vagas on a regular basis, I guess I can see both sides of the coin. In this case, though, I am speaking as someone who currently flies solely Minmatar ships. I can see that speed-tanking is perhaps a bit too prevalent these days, I'm not one for making up stats but I'd hazard a guess that most HACs used in PVP are speed fitted and I'm quite sure this can;t be what CCP intended - the Vaga certainly but Zealot, Ishtar, Sacrilege and, to an extent, the Cerberus too? I guess it comes down to how one proposes to solve this and there have been a number of suggestions, both good and bad. Balance isn't easy without making all ships the same and in this case, adjusting non-race specific attributes such as the stacking of speed mods/rigs will adversely affect the Vagabond (which would be very sub-par in the HAC world without a reasonable speed tank) while forcing everyone else to start fitting generic tank setups. This will prompt complaints from Vaga pilots (i.e. re-balance the ship) and it will reduce variation in setups quite drastically. What we really need is some kind of way to encourage variation while not making any particular ship/setup so strong that it will dominate the others. Will it ever happen? Who knows - there's been a FOTM for as long as I have played EVE (I'm sure many remember the old Gank-geddons, dual-mwd ruptures/ravens, non-chance-based ECM etc) and I wouldn't want to be the CCP guy in charge of trying to address it.
Lakut Arcane Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.11 13:11:00 - [260] Originally by: deadmeet I see one very good idea one day on that forum, it was to move the MWD and AB to low slot. - It would remove one slot for nano - It would reduce (a little) the big hole between armor tank and shield tank in PVP - It's more Role play (why all speed mod are low slow and not MWD and AB, its a non-sense) Whar about this idea ? Seconded, because of the first two points (screw RP ). I could also imagine changing some of the drawbacks from the common nanofit modules, since they're basically no drawback at all in that context. For example, have: - InStabs reduce cap (max or recharge) instead of adding lolsigradius (like anybody would care when the MWD is turned on, anyway) - overdrives screw with the inertia modifier instead of reducing cargohold ---------- You get a wonderful view from the point of no return.

Mairead Blade	Posted - 2008.04.11 14:43:00 - [261] What would Triumvirate do without ships able to go Eleventy-Billion metres per second? OP, its a crazy idea.
stinger7	Posted - 2008.04.11 14:49:00 - [262] Originally by: Mairead Blade What would Triumvirate do without ships able to go Eleventy-Billion metres per second? OP, its a crazy idea. Like most skilled small gang pvpers in eve they would proly use one of the many other ways in eve to kick butt until the whiners cried to ccp for another nerf. Rinse and repeat.
Fleet Oisin	Posted - 2008.04.11 14:56:00 - [263] "skilled pvp'ers" I agree that the top pilots in Tri are very, very good. However there is an inordinate amount of not so very good, made-to-look-good by skilled gang leadership [the same top pilots]. This will come out in the wash one day. Rinse that afterward.
stinger7	Posted - 2008.04.11 15:00:00 - [264] Edited by: stinger7 on 11/04/2008 15:01:02 Originally by: Fleet Oisin "skilled pvp'ers" I agree that the top pilots in Tri are very, very good. However there is an inordinate amount of not so very good, made-to-look-good by skilled gang leadership [the same top pilots]. This will come out in the wash one day. Rinse that afterward. So nerf good FC's?...lol just because the good pilots in other alliances cannot be bothered to train up or lead there lesser skilled pilots is hardly the fault of alliances that do train/lead there less skilled pilots now is it.
Fleet Oisin	Posted - 2008.04.11 15:08:00 - [265] The point is your statement implied that ALL the Tri pilots were over and above what they meet in combat. If you are fair you know this not to be true. The truth is there is a top 5% who are excellent. They are Tri and they should be rightly respected and indeed feared on the field. Because they are that good and if you make wrong decisions they'll have you. It is they and not the minions who tip the balance in Tri's favour most of the time. The point about skilling FC's in Tri is not a fair reflection. The same FC's usually lead pretty much generically. Again if your are fair you will accept this to be true.
stinger7	Posted - 2008.04.11 15:18:00 - [266] Edited by: stinger7 on 11/04/2008 15:21:08 Originally by: Fleet Oisin The point is your statement implied that ALL the Tri pilots were over and above what they meet in combat. If you are fair you know this not to be true. The truth is there is a top 5% who are excellent. They are Tri and they should be rightly respected and indeed feared on the field. Because they are that good and if you make wrong decisions they'll have you. It is they and not the minions who tip the balance in Tri's favour most of the time. The point about skilling FC's in Tri is not a fair reflection. The same FC's usually lead pretty much generically. Again if your are fair you will accept this to be true. Just because the top 5% in tri can kick ass or other skilled gang pilots in eve can do it is no reason to nerf ships (cos the imbalance is in the layers not the ships) but a good reason for the other 95% to improve. We all sucked at eve at one time or another even these "top pilots" but some of us trained up, listened, learned and improved while others sat around doing nothing but complaining that the game is unbalanced. Ive had over 80 kills on my main this month (10 days in) and im not flying in a nano gang, although i have flown against them and killed a lot. While i've seen some of the biggest whiners on this forum KB stats and they have not lost one single ship to a nano gang EVER and had less than 200 kills in nearly 2 years.
Fleet Oisin	Posted - 2008.04.11 15:27:00 - [267] I didn't actually comment on the OP so I will now. No I don't think the speed tank needs nerfed. There are ways and means to defend against it. I think the more rapier and huginn pilots that skill up will see the predominance of the Vaga and other out and out speed tank ships fall by the way side. I think there is some validity in saying that excessive speed is kind of a back-door WCS. If we take lead from real life Aeronautical engineering as an analogy, speed is obtained by removing firepower and armor. Guns, bombs, missiles, ammunitions and armor are heavy. I would think that dropping a turret or bay for every speed mod you fit may be a good way to balance this out. So you still have all the speed you choose or indeed all the hitting power you choose. Your choice as a pilot. In my humble opinion I believe that to be an excellent way to form a balance. But the status quo suits me as well. I like the speed tank, I like the armor tank. Whatever.
Matrixcvd Caldari Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.04.11 16:00:00 - [268] If you PVP you need a MWD, its a fundamental rule. You need to be able to warp/align quickly, need to be able to bounce off gates, or reapproach. The biggest misconception about Speed "tanking" is that only works when you really aren't doing damage except with drones for most ships, except missile boats. This is easy to see why because when you're dying to any ship its like the whole world crashin in, but Drones can be shot, and cerbs only go like 2-4k without huge investments if you really fly both types then you know how to kill both, speed and normal tanked ships and everything in between. Because something is more prevelent doesn't make it wrong, especially since its not 1 ship/ship class. When you see 1 ship perdominately then you know something is amiss, but everyone in hear aggress, cerbs, zealots, recons etc are out there roaming Moving the MWD to a low is not an answer, come on, how much would the normal tanked pilots complain about that. nano allows small gangs to move quickly, engage what they can and move on. The reality is certain people, who either can't yet fly the ships or refuse to pick up the tactics, or fly balanced fleets or use their brain, run into a brick wall which is what i am making fun of in the previous poast. That is not game balancing. These people want to have their fights, their way with big slow ships for a variety of reasons. they dont understand why people would come into "their space" and cause a rukus, be able to leave before they can get organized and now will not stay and fight. Simply saying you dont think people should be able to escape fights, or that this ship "should" be able to do this is not a reason to suggest a "balance" its an us or them situation now, i simply will not listen to people who think nano is overpowered because they are clearly not, and it goes to the heart of what CCP has been doing, not doing, and or redoing, remeber the deimos changes?
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.11 16:42:00 - [269] After participating in nearly 40 pages worth of nano discussions, I have come to 1 important understanding: The "nano problem" is a battle of ideologies. It's like Democates vs Republicans, Christians vs Muslims. Both sides can come up with valid arguments from their point of view, but these points of view will never cross. No agreement is possible between these ideologies. We just have to learn to accept each others differences. The game balance shouldn't be shifted in favor of either party. Choose stability.
Lakut Arcane Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.11 16:45:00 - [270] Originally by: Matrixcvd Moving the MWD to a low is not an answer, come on, how much would the normal tanked pilots complain about that. Dunno. How much would the normal shield tanked pilots rejoice about that? And does it cancel eachother out in that case? ---------- You get a wonderful view from the point of no return.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.