| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 |
3081. Announcement:Tonight's fleet fight in Z9PP-H - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Heptameron wrote: Arrendis wrote: You know, I'm not gonna call for the guy's head - it was a typo. when. Typo? Seriously?? They weren't typing in u instead of you, not hitting the jump instead of bridge button, they were messing with live...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.07.05 09:18:00
|
3082. Announcement:Tonight's fleet fight in Z9PP-H - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Heptameron wrote: It was shaping up to be a war changer and CCP 'insert hopefully now jobless engineer here' screwed it up. But hey, the clock keeps ticking and in the forward direction so not much point dwelling on might have beens. You ...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.07.05 08:41:00
|
3083. Announcement:Tonight's fleet fight in Z9PP-H - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Hrald wrote: OldWolf69 wrote: Hrald wrote: Barramuda wrote: Hrald wrote: Are you willing to pay more for your subscription and jack up the price of PLEX to pay for unplanned hardware upgrades? Well,. I can understand why you agre...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.07.05 06:01:00
|
3084. Announcement:Tonight's fleet fight in Z9PP-H - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Rockstara wrote: CCP falcon: do not let this discourage you from remapping nodes. If we're really lucky this will encourage you to develop a "live reinforce" mode. That fight was raging for hours ... it would surely have benefited from a remap ...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.07.05 04:42:00
|
3085. Announcement:Tonight's fleet fight in Z9PP-H - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
CCP Falcon wrote: the decision was made to remap all other systems away from the node on which Z9PP-H was located in order to improve responsiveness and playability. [...] This was put into play at 22:14 UTC, however due to an error in commun...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.07.05 01:04:00
|
3086. CCP SERVER ENGINEERS ARE IN TEST - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Alavaria Fera wrote: Only a small fraction of the playerbase. Well, duh , we make use of POS mechanics. Everyone knows POS mechanics affect only a small fraction of the playerbase, remember?
- by Arrendis - at 2013.07.05 00:14:00
|
3087. CCP SERVER ENGINEERS ARE IN TEST - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Ayures wrote: ****, you're right. I wouldn't want to interfere with the narrative. Ayures, seriously, why is this level of incompetence acceptable? When it happened to CFC dreads, why was it acceptable then? Modern IT systems should be cr...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.07.05 00:11:00
|
3088. CCP SERVER ENGINEERS ARE IN TEST - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
CCP Phantom wrote: The command to remap everything other than Z9PP-H from the current server node was mis-entered. Instead of moving everything else than Z9PP-H, the command was given to move everything else than Q9PP-H. Was this on a dvora...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.07.04 23:55:00
|
3089. CCP SERVER ENGINEERS ARE IN TEST - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Ayures wrote: We'll trade them for the metric ****-ton of CFC dreads we've had tackled when a node crashed and the pilots refused to log back in. Sounds fine by me - my issue here isn't ZOMG, TEST CARRIERS LIVED. **** happens, battles turn,...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.07.04 23:48:00
|
3090. CCP SERVER ENGINEERS ARE IN TEST - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Imodesky Kafelnikov wrote: ito kazami wrote: fisrt , we want a ccp internal affairs investigation , too much N3 / test favouring lately to be coincidence. 2nd , we want those carriers and battleships saved by ccp to be removed from the game...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.07.04 23:39:00
|
3091. CCP SERVER ENGINEERS ARE IN TEST - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
GRIEV3R wrote: In spite of all the idiots sperging on this thread, I have one honest question: Why weren't the tackled capital ships still there when we logged back in? They were in warp disruption bubbles with agro timers. According to everyt...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.07.04 23:32:00
|
3092. Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials, Round 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Markku Laaksonen wrote: CCP Rise wrote: We are going to go ahead and bump the unpacked volume on the Hoarder significantly (up to 400000) to avoid any major issues with compression. This gives it the same packed volume to cargo ratio that th...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.06.28 16:35:00
|
3093. Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials, Round 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Anna Sharisa wrote: Good change but for prfessionnal miner we need a better cargo with ore bay, 42000m3 is not enough, we need to put 2, 3 maybe 4 can for useful industrial ship actualy if you mine in small grp you have nothing good at small...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.06.28 16:25:00
|
3094. Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials, Round 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Thorne Zyman wrote: I can only think of one example of a cargo fit ship which isn't a T1 or T2 industrial (or ORE Industrial) and that's the ol' Honour Tanked Revelation. Really? How much liquid ozone does an ibis hold without cargohold exp...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.06.28 16:22:00
|
3095. Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials, Round 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Benny Ohu wrote: ccp is perfectly capable of prioritising their own work on the game. it doesn't and shouldn't stop us discussing industrial balance. Well, then let's discuss! CCP's obviously decided they want haulers to handle 35-40k on t...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.06.28 09:03:00
|
3096. Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials, Round 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Endeavour Starfleet wrote: One says he pays others to do his hauling. Fair enough but for someone who is spacerich this is like George HW Bush's Grocery store moment. Well, keep in mind, that organizational capability I was talking about? I...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.06.28 08:14:00
|
3097. Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials, Round 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Benny Ohu wrote: yeah but what i meant by the 'house on sand' thing is that if there's a problem with expanders, they must be considered at the same time as t1 indies anyway. if t2 stuff needs to be tweaked or balanced at the same time, then i...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.06.28 08:01:00
|
3098. Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials, Round 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote: If it was a fleet hanger instead of an ammo only bay, that would give it some serious utility near a battlefield. With the current mechanics, all the ammo Hoarder could do is drop a jetcan of ammo for others to loot....
- by Arrendis - at 2013.06.28 07:57:00
|
3099. Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials, Round 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Benny Ohu wrote: i see no reason t2 haulers would have to be balanced next to expanders. they'd suffer the same percieved problems t1 would anyway. besides, if something is broken you fix it, you don't keep building your house on sand. even if...
- by Arrendis - at 2013.06.28 07:43:00
|
3100. Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials, Round 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Endeavour Starfleet wrote: I am agreeing with a goon? In this topic? WHAT!? Goons aren't always the bad guys. Or even the Bad at EVEGäó guys.
- by Arrendis - at 2013.06.28 07:34:00
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |