Pages: [1] 2 |
1. Wormhole 'Futures' Discussion (Please Bob, yield content) - in Wormholes [original thread]
It's good to see that his thread has remained a productive and engaging conversation instead of devolving into petty squabbling over past slights.
- by Anhenka - at 2014.07.06 16:34:00
|
2. Tools used by Wormholer Corporations? - in Wormholes [original thread]
Well the truly elite use out of party tools like Civ V, Dota, or watching the World Cup to minimize the amount of time that one actually spends playing eve. On a more serious note: Siggy. Oh god yes. Even if you only have a few people in your cor...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.07.03 17:19:00
|
3. Removing wandering Kspace connections from c6 holes - in Wormholes [original thread]
Trinkets friend wrote: Next in CCP's basket of bad ideas and ****** surprises: Brown colourtags for furries, so you know who to primary I fully endorse this product. On a more serious note.... Really CCP? Active scanning modules? ...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.05.21 21:26:00
|
4. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Rain6637 wrote: those rocks were never meant to fit through the openings of the system, and I imagine CCP would like for there to be as much loss in wormholes as there is ISK, and then some. I'm pretty sure that's what this change is about. ...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.04.01 15:25:00
|
5. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Mal Nina wrote: So how do we fix? Get rid of escalations!. Face it we know how to milk these for all their worth in the larger corps. So... remove the primary source of income that makes living several holes deep into WH space a viable choi...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.29 20:19:00
|
6. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Tvashnar Crendraven wrote: The originally proposed change seems rather poorly thought out. The only way a wh occupant can identify a new k162 is by having probes out and scanning down the sig; a new sig in the scanner window can be any one of ...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.28 22:18:00
|
7. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
unimatrix0030 wrote: Why do you guys always say that this would only benefit dudes who don't scan their chain? This carefree PVE wich drives down prices and make c1-c4 residents complain that their risk/reward ratio is so low is a real problem ...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.27 00:15:00
|
8. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Olari Vanderfall wrote: The changes don't need to be so dramatic and I think people could easily adjust, rather than knowing that their system always spawns a C2 static and running the forgotten whatever has these frigates as triggers. Maybe 9...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.26 00:50:00
|
9. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Todd Jaeger wrote: For those who are already bad it wouldn't make a difference, since they seem to be bad enough that we can catch them on a regular basis. There is nobody so bad they they can't get worse. And when the going gets tough, t...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.26 00:31:00
|
10. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Olari Vanderfall wrote: If you want danger, how about randomizing w-space. It has been deconstructed so much that there is no sense of mystery. Remove the system names, randomly link different types of wormholes, mix up "statics", dynamic slee...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.26 00:02:00
|
11. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Rain6637 wrote: regarding my previous comment about why it's so hard to find wormholes on SiSi... it makes sense if it is intended to give an advantage to the player at the head of the wormhole via surprise, and this proposed change also makes ...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.25 18:50:00
|
12. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Rain6637 wrote: the size of the rocks they put out there should tell you they've always been trying to get miners killed Seems true. Unfortunately, the easier you make it to catch them, the few targets are actually available. WH mining sh...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.25 17:11:00
|
13. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Bjurn Akely wrote: Anhenka wrote: I mean, how many c1-4 corps can you actually name as significant? Significant? What is that in the sandbox content? Frankly I find your statement a bit elitist. I've come across very skilled and organ...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.25 07:54:00
|
14. Please Vote! Poll on proposed WH scanning changes - in Wormholes [original thread]
Jack Miton wrote: Anhenka wrote: Paikis wrote: 1. Overlay shouldn't be delayed, so much as it should ONLY update when you use probes. 2. ALL sites in wormholes should require probes (yes, I include anoms AND sigs in this) If you ever vo...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.25 01:43:00
|
15. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Tyrant Scorn wrote: Would a small Townhall meeting on TeamSpeak be a good idea to discuss ideas and opinions or maybe I could gather some prominent wormholers and have a discussion and live stream it. I would be willing to go as far as getting ...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.25 01:04:00
|
16. Please Vote! Poll on proposed WH scanning changes - in Wormholes [original thread]
Paikis wrote: 1. Overlay shouldn't be delayed, so much as it should ONLY update when you use probes. 2. ALL sites in wormholes should require probes (yes, I include anoms AND sigs in this) If you ever voice that idea to the people that do th...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.25 00:56:00
|
17. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Two step wrote: That is simply not true. If anything the majority of people who actually live in w-space seem to agree that without probes, there should be a delay for K162s to show up. Current Poll results from the poll posted a few pages ...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.25 00:07:00
|
18. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
ORACOM wrote: At the behest of my alliance mates, I am posting this for consideration by the WH community. From what I have gathered, CCP are trying to address two possible scenarios - both of which currenlty equate to zero risk on the WH res...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.25 00:05:00
|
19. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
unimatrix0030 wrote: Einar Matveinen wrote: Zukan wrote: Surely the same should apply to nullsec too? Delayed entry in the local chat channel. Botters and Ratters hiding is even more annoying and more frequently an issue than missing a w...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.24 20:32:00
|
20. Sticky:Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for... - in Wormholes [original thread]
Zappity wrote: 1. Remove Discovery Scanner automagical sig pop-up and let probes pick up as usual. 2. Add J-space ESS with these features: - Provides automagical sig pop-up exactly as now. - Does not work if a ship is within x km radius (so ...
- by Anhenka - at 2014.03.24 19:29:00
|
Pages: [1] 2 |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |