Pages: [1] 2 3 |
1. Winter release builds Change/ Bug log. - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
When will be accepting connections?
- by Dray - at 2012.10.24 15:46:00
|
2. SISI & BUCK Down? - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
It's not accepting connections.
- by Dray - at 2012.10.24 15:40:00
|
3. Thanks CCP for making the Naga a pile of garbage not worth flying. - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Draahk Chimera wrote: Dray wrote: Draahk Chimera wrote: Not commenting on the usefulness of the resulting ship Random rant about something I didn't say Reading comprehension 4tw. I apologise, I'm sure if you'd said the same ...
- by Dray - at 2011.11.08 20:44:00
|
4. New Phobos Model - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
It used to look like a *****, now it looks like a ***** with genital warts. Not much difference tbh but it needs to be more careful where it docks.........
- by Dray - at 2011.11.07 07:35:00
|
5. Thanks CCP for making the Naga a pile of garbage not worth flying. - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Draahk Chimera wrote: Not commenting un the usefulness of the resulting ship I think the bonuses makes complete sense actually, considering what they where trying to do. 1. Caldari rail ships have a tank bonus + an optimal bonus. 2. Drake has ...
- by Dray - at 2011.11.06 10:55:00
|
6. Thanks CCP for making the Naga a pile of garbage not worth flying. - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Captain Megadeath wrote: Zagdul wrote: IMO, the Caldari boat should focus on being a missle platform w/ a missile velocity bonus. NO! Caldari have TWO main racial weapons. Missiles and hybrids. The Naga should continue to have both we...
- by Dray - at 2011.11.06 09:36:00
|
7. Thanks CCP for making the Naga a pile of garbage not worth flying. - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Already mentioned in another thread that the Naga should have 4 bonus, 2 for hybrids, 2 for missiles but only apply the bonus if a full rack of the same weapon system is fitted, if I'm honest it should just be torps but CCP like to push the envelo...
- by Dray - at 2011.11.05 23:47:00
|
8. Oracle good:Naga bad - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
LOL at the Naga, dual weap bonus is not a good idea, in fact it's a bad idea, always has been, always will be. The only way to do dual weapons is to give it 2 bonus for each system but only apply the relevant bonus when you fit a full rack of tha...
- by Dray - at 2011.11.05 11:51:00
|
9. Feedback on Sansha Supercarrier - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
I must admit I'm not sold on it, I can't understand why they would want to introduce a pirate super carrier, lets be honest Eve needs more super caps like one legged people need @rse kicking competitions. As some mentioned early in the thread it'...
- by Dray - at 2010.11.12 05:54:00
|
10. Feedback on Sansha Supercarrier - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Originally by: Weaselior The best way to fix this is give it a 3-5% bonus per level to the effectiveness of all warfare links. Actually the best fix would be not to introduce it at all.
- by Dray - at 2010.11.11 19:52:00
|
11. Feedback on Sansha Supercarrier - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Originally by: Raivi A supercarrier designed purely for solo ratting. Excellent. This. There's nothing quite like the truth when it comes to great comedy.
- by Dray - at 2010.11.11 19:48:00
|
12. New uses for PLEX? - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
As a 03 player it doesn't really affect me, I have over 120m sp and a yearly remap is more than enough, I like the idea if they allow for players upto say 10m or 20m sp, just to help them even more, or allow it but say one additional remap per 12 ...
- by Dray - at 2010.10.29 00:19:00
|
13. Pirate ship changes for Dominion - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Edited by: Dray on 14/09/2009 23:31:29 Is it me or did the mach just become a better mission runner ship? Falloff bonus prob makes it better than a marauder because of grid plus 3 rig slots? Such a shame for such a great ship. That said, ...
- by Dray - at 2009.09.14 23:26:00
|
14. Naglfar, Captial Projectile Turrets and Citadel Torpedos - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Edited by: Dray on 29/04/2009 20:14:20 Still not good enough, versatility does not work at the capital level, it needs to have 3 turrets and ditch the citadel launchers slots and bonus. This of course will not happen as they'll have a lot of ...
- by Dray - at 2009.04.29 20:12:00
|
15. Black Ops Fuel bay. - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Tbh, I'm very disappointed, I don't pretend to be a code monkey but how hard is it to increase jump range or add a fuel bay. The ships have been bollox for so long now its not even funny.
- by Dray - at 2009.02.23 09:54:00
|
16. Black Ops Fuel bay. - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
another bump, any dev response?
- by Dray - at 2009.02.21 19:15:00
|
17. Black Ops Fuel bay. - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Originally by: Rex Lashar You have a fuel bay, its called a cargohold. The amount of space you need for ammo to remain viable in PVP is negligible, and unless you rely on cap charges.. what else are you going to carry around? A black ops w...
- by Dray - at 2009.02.20 06:02:00
|
18. Black Ops Fuel bay. - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Originally by: Lachesis Moirae Why not just do all 3? They clearly need some loving, and the combination of all 3 would make them a lot more useful. 4. Covops Cynos can be lit in cyno-jammed systems Not sure if that ever made it in, b...
- by Dray - at 2009.02.18 20:41:00
|
19. Black Ops Fuel bay. - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Originally by: Armoured C erm you ot a cloaking transport that can also use the jump portal... i believe that a big enough fuel bay for you Allowing blockade runners to use the jump portal is not a reason to go back on the black ops fu...
- by Dray - at 2009.02.18 20:28:00
|
20. Black Ops Fuel bay. - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
Is this coming or has it been dropped?
- by Dray - at 2009.02.18 16:51:00
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |