| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 |
101. Nosferatu and Khanid changes on the test server, new Blog by Fendahl - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Originally by: Sanilnar What about this idea, Im sure it already has been asked but under the miniscule chance it hasnt... how about this: Keep NOS at a percentage, say small do 2%, medium 4%, and large 6%. We have no stacking penalty bu...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.08.02 19:59:00
|
102. Nosferatu and Khanid changes on the test server, new Blog by Fendahl - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
yup, especially as infinity progresses more and more, did anyone try the combat simulator yet? _________________________________________________ For more players and action in lowsec
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.08.02 19:54:00
|
103. Nosferatu and Khanid changes on the test server, new Blog by Fendahl - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Originally by: RossP Zoyka Originally by: Falun Assad Edited by: Falun Assad on 02/08/2007 15:03:40 Originally by: CCP Fendahl This specific mechanics was chosen for Nosferatus since it has the following desirable pro...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.08.02 19:08:00
|
104. Nosferatu and Khanid changes on the test server, new Blog by Fendahl - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
agreed _________________________________________________ For more players and action in lowsec
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.08.02 18:04:00
|
105. Nosferatu and Khanid changes on the test server, new Blog by Fendahl - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
The thing that is really bugging me about this nos change is that it gives crappy pilots (read low skills) an advantage over skilled pilots. A percentage based approach is more useful, while i find the sig radius approach to hard to implement. I...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.08.01 10:51:00
|
106. Nosferatu and Khanid changes on the test server, new Blog by Fendahl - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
The one thing i dont like about the khanid changes is that it leaves all amarr pilots, who specialized in lasers, with 1 AF that can't properly tackle on its own. This was the vengance niche so far, since the retribution cant do it with just one ...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.31 17:07:00
|
107. ORE Refining Ship - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
at the risk of getting flamed, but i dont like this idea, because it will macroers invincible, so it should not be allowed for high sec. For low sec and 0.0 you should be able to use a carrier and a freighter. A refining ship would make POS refin...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.26 23:20:00
|
108. Anti macro/chinafarmer idea(s) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: velocity7 Edited by: velocity7 on 26/07/2007 16:10:12 Regarding the NPC spawn idea... how about rats have a default damage level they put out for all ships based on system security, and then this increases (to a limit) b...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.26 17:48:00
|
109. Anti macro/chinafarmer idea(s) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
i agree, the time codes have to disappear. BC/ cruiser spawn idea has earned positiv replies so far. the concrod brbery system is off the table, but forcing players out of startup npc corps and making them independent freelancers (one-man-corp) ...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.26 14:28:00
|
110. Anti macro/chinafarmer idea(s) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
well what you propose would be a very simple yet effective solution allthough they would switch to BS for mining rather quick. The biggest problem i see is how you explain it ingame... the "independent freelancer" one man corp solution seems more...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.26 00:23:00
|
111. Ship Crews (They're Here, They're Real, get Over it) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
i like the idea of crews: there should be 3 different types: Engineers: automatic, allthough slow repair of structure, integrity(i will explain this in a bit) and armor Marines: Defend the ship against boarding parties Crew: does the same a...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.26 00:11:00
|
112. Anti macro/chinafarmer idea(s) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
i really dont get the 'scary' part of the concord bribery suggestion. Yes such an 'incident' could escalate into a major engagement if both sides call their buddies in. But hey that can already happen with ore thievery.. Also the fact that it ca...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.25 23:53:00
|
113. MACRO MINERS ALIVE AND PROSPERING ! ! ! ! - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
my solution: link _________________________________________________ For more players and action in lowsec
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.25 22:12:00
|
114. Anti macro/chinafarmer idea(s) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: copicus Killing ships by bribing concord would be a bad idea,it would open the gates to a gankfest in empire. There is also a possibility that a suspected farmer may not actually bo one, thus the innocent are punished. ...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.25 21:45:00
|
115. Anti macro/chinafarmer idea(s) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
mmh, i see your point regarding petitions, allthough i have received messages from GMs that they would look into the matter, however they were premade messages, so it is rather doubtful that they will actually do something. about cruiser and BC s...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.25 21:27:00
|
116. Anti macro/chinafarmer idea(s) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
no comments??? _________________________________________________ For more players and action in lowsec
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.25 18:58:00
|
117. Anti macro/chinafarmer idea(s) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Ok, everybody knows this, if u find macroers or chinafarmers all u can do is to flip his can. this works good with macroers, but it does not work with china farmers, which have a similar bad impact on the market. So there are a few things that mig...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.25 16:36:00
|
118. Theory of Colonization Features - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: Duhmad IbnRa on 16/07/2007 18:08:07 Edited by: Duhmad IbnRa on 16/07/2007 18:06:43 i would vote against terraforming, because it is simply unrealistic. Domes are more feasable. IMHO planets should produce trade products, which c...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.16 18:06:00
|
119. Change "Approach" to "Align-to" when out of Approach Range! - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
i signed it once, and i am signing it again. i would stop, if CCP would let us know that they are at least considering it... _________________________________________________ For more players and action in lowsec
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.07.09 18:02:00
|
120. Proposal to fix cloaks, SBs, bombs and other stuff - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
To fix cloaks i suggest the following: 1.: Set local to recent annoucment mode (this is how the help channel works), nobody should know how many and what people are in a system by simply looking at local channel. 2.: give the directional scanner, ...
- by Duhmad IbnRa - at 2007.06.27 17:38:00
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |