Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 [70] 80 |
1381. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Tora Bushido wrote: Just disable reps and microwarps when using it. Then ship size would matter as much. You need to disable ABs as well, or we'll from Trollceptors to Troll Phatasms
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.09 14:24:52
|
1382. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
xttz wrote: Arkon Olacar wrote: The stats for the T1 module seem pretty good. The stats for the T2 version are completely off. 25km vs 250km, are you high? The best way to determine who has grid control is by limiting the range on the modul...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.09 14:23:07
|
1383. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
xttz wrote: Fozzie, what was the intention of not allowing remote assistance while using Entosis Links? If it was to curb the extremes of armour/shield-tanking that would require specialised fleets to deal with, the same logic should apply to ...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.09 14:18:55
|
1384. Allow ISD to merge threads with same subject - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Pretty much any idea to make the forum a more effective communicaiton tool would require CCP to scrap this version and use a baseline product that doesn't suck balls as soon as you open the box.
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.09 13:40:57
|
1385. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Aralyn Cormallen wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We can use everything from module price... Please, please, learn from experience. Price is not a sensible balance mechanic in any way. *cough cough* supercaps online *cough*
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.09 13:37:39
|
1386. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Amyclas Amatin wrote: Dave Stark wrote: Amyclas Amatin wrote: Wishful thinking. If Entosis links flip/destroy structures, they will be the center of our doctrines. We play to win. so basically anything without a utility high is already...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.09 13:29:59
|
1387. Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Anthar Thebess wrote: Can we also remove standings? What you have in your alliance ... is blue , every thing else neut. It wouldn't do anything. People would just use out of game tools like Provi does to manage their standings.
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.09 13:20:04
|
1388. Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Basil Pupkin wrote: Once again, Fozzie proves to be an obedient goon lad pog. Is there anything in those changes which isn't a goon wet dream? No, nothing, only goonies win. Like they took the biggest win in jump fatigue changes, and Fozzie'...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.09 12:58:10
|
1389. Why so Split on Supers? - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Kestral Anneto wrote: Ok, why is the community so split on Supers, or even Caps in general? Is it a simple case of jealousy of not having them, while others do? Why do people think that they are bad for the game? Why do people think that they a...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.07 21:48:28
|
1390. Capitals and supers - give us something to do with them - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Scatim Helicon wrote: Allow supercaps to crash into outposts to destroy them, killing two birds with one stone. If that happens, I might actually finally have a reason to buy one.
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.06 19:22:10
|
1391. Each rebalance seems to require a future rebalance - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Elenahina wrote: I'm just curious why VOLT would stop responding in their usual fashion after Fozzie Sov descends.. Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: The current plan w...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.06 18:20:48
|
1392. Sov change dev blog - in CSM Campaigns [original thread]
Dersen Lowery wrote: Xander Phoena's feedback: Xander Phoena wrote: Anyway, we got access to the first draft of this blog last week. HereGÇÖs the feedback I provided directly: Whilst I like the technical advantage provided by spreading fig...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.06 18:05:43
|
1393. Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
M1k3y Koontz wrote: Dead serious, Goons or NC. Could get the 70 guys, but my alliance wouldnt be able to. Hell, back when I was in INK when i first got out of highsec we couldnt pry people away from their anoms long enough to run vanguards. ...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.06 17:43:55
|
1394. Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Rain6637 wrote: For only 5 ISK a day, you can help sponsor Special Eddie . Eddie was diagnosed with Entosis at the age of five, after his parents noticed they were unable to hold his attention for more than 5 minutes at a time. Initially, fr...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.06 17:39:18
|
1395. Each rebalance seems to require a future rebalance - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: You aren't thinking big enough or where the weaknesses lie. Well, let's take the system as presented (though we're straying a little far afield for this particular thread). Fozzie-sov hits. Your alliance sets you...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.06 16:50:30
|
1396. Each rebalance seems to require a future rebalance - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Elenahina wrote: Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Elenahina wrote: If people lose indicies because of afk cloakers, they didn't deserve the space in the first place. ... ... because we are all bilingual in Japane...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.06 15:27:48
|
1397. Each rebalance seems to require a future rebalance - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Elenahina wrote: If people lose indicies because of afk cloakers, they didn't deserve the space in the first place. ... ... because we are all bilingual in Japanese or have managed to carve off an organised grou...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.06 15:09:40
|
1398. Each rebalance seems to require a future rebalance - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
sabre906 wrote: The next iteration of sov null warfare will be afk spam - you spam afk campers to get system indices down, so you can take systems. Soon, instead of structure grinds, you'll be called on cloaking camping duty. And there will be ...
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.06 15:03:51
|
1399. Each rebalance seems to require a future rebalance - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Snupe Doggur wrote: Worry when CCP stops rebalancing. This will be the second sign that Eve is actually dying. The first will be they stop having Fanfest.
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.06 15:02:28
|
1400. Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Seven Koskanaiken wrote: ... paplink requirements Never. Ever. Again. Everytime someone says the word paplink out loud I break whatever I'm holding.
- by Elenahina - at 2015.03.06 13:39:17
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 [70] 80 |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |