| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [20] 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 |
381. Ancillary Shield Booster use should be nerfed - in EVE Alliance Tournament Discussion [original thread]
CCP Soundwave wrote: It offers a load of flexibility which I think makes it pretty damn awesome in terms of getting different setups. Why restrict it to just one per ship then? Let's have even more 'flexibility' next time, just like we're...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.23 17:15:00
|
382. Ancillary Shield Booster use should be nerfed - in EVE Alliance Tournament Discussion [original thread]
Lexa Hellfury wrote: I really don't understand why CCP thought adding more tank to the game was a good idea. People keep talking about how it's a buff to solo/small gang (<5) PvP, which is not the case at all. It limits solo PvP/small ga...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.23 13:04:00
|
383. Ship Balancing: Intermediate Classes (DD and BC) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Saul Elsyn wrote: Tier 2 Battlecruisers should be buffed for the purpose of becoming line or assault vessels. What?
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.20 22:04:00
|
384. Will CCP ever make the t2 plates worth fitting? - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Active tanking indeed does not need a straight increase in tanking values - and that's why introduction of ancillary shield boosters was a huge mistake - but current buffer tanks don't need any buffs either, just the reverse - EHP values are alrea...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.20 09:48:00
|
385. Will CCP ever make the t2 plates worth fitting? - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Bumping cause we still need a response.
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.19 23:23:00
|
386. Blasters, 8 months later - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Cpt Branko wrote: Various blasterboats do need fixes to be better then now, and to make rail configurations make sense, but what it certainly does not need is a tracking buff. People which cannot fly their ships deserve no buffs. What exactl...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.18 16:07:00
|
387. Ancillary Shield Booster: WTF? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Bouh Revetoile wrote: Dude, how many seconds does it take to kill an ASB ship with 10 people ? I'm not even sure it will have time to finish it's load of cap charge... Obviously you have no idea on what you're talking about and should re-rea...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 15:06:00
|
388. Ancillary Shield Booster: WTF? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Bouh Revetoile wrote: Now, stop telling me I'm a stupid noob, because if I may be a noob, but I'm not stupid, and I expect you to be smart enough to argue what you are saying, so we can speak as civilized people. Dude, i easily gave you a ge...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 14:48:00
|
389. Inferno Armour Repairer? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Shpenat wrote: That CCP opted for buffing T2 rather than nerfing meta0 - meta4 is either laziness or more likely the less work to do. It might be a plain lack of pvp comprehension. Also, they could buff it in terms of mass rather then shee...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 14:38:00
|
390. Ancillary Shield Booster: WTF? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Bouh Revetoile wrote: Fon Revedhort wrote: Your PvP experience is extremely limited and I've pointed that already. Yes, but that was not an argument, so I ignored it. It's a matter of being able to talk with the same language. You don'...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 14:30:00
|
391. Inferno Armour Repairer? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Takeshi Yamato wrote: Paikis wrote: random stuff Good job comparing a 4 slot armor tank vs a 3 slot shield tank and concluding that the armor tank is better 2 neuts and extra range are irrelevant things, too "10% DPS"
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 13:12:00
|
392. Inferno Armour Repairer? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Shpenat wrote: I think CCP wanted to compensate with reactive armor hardener. And I think CCP wanted to troll. This point of view can be futher backed up with them increasing HP bonus at tech2 armour plates . What an intelligent way of pr...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 12:57:00
|
393. Inferno Armour Repairer? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Paikis wrote: You're using ALL of the available mid slots to fit a tank, what happens when you do the same with the lows? Let me guess: you end up with a ship of no damage and literally no mobility? A fat sitting duck. How awesome!
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 12:38:00
|
394. Ancillary Shield Booster: WTF? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Your PvP experience is extremely limited and I've pointed that already. This problem arises at any level where ABS is applicable, up to 1 vs 10 engagements at the very least. ABS pretty much guarantees you no longer can separate a ship and kill i...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 12:34:00
|
395. Inferno Armour Repairer? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Paikis wrote: We're talking about TANKING. Active and buffer are two different types of TANKING. you cannot consider one without considering the other. If you make active armor tanking as good as shield armor tanking while leaving it with large...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 12:07:00
|
396. Ancillary Shield Booster: WTF? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Lexa Hellfury wrote: Drew Solaert wrote: I love the module, I think its opened up a lot of solo options I disagree. I think rather than open up solo options it limits them. If you are not in an ASB fit ship you are completely unable to en...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 12:02:00
|
397. Inferno Armour Repairer? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Paikis wrote: Fon Revedhort wrote: Bullcrap, you can not fit LAR onto BC/CS. 'Much bigger' (like what, 25%?) buffer tank is balanced by it's SPEED. How come someone still can't undestand this? Also, it has no relation to ACTIVE tanking what...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 11:55:00
|
398. Inferno Armour Repairer? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Paikis wrote: Spugg Galdon wrote: Fon Revedhort wrote: In fact, there are NO reasons to avoid making BOTH active armour and active shield tanking EQUALLY VIABLE. Couldn't agree more. They just need to be "different" at the same time. ...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 11:29:00
|
399. Inferno Armour Repairer? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Spugg Galdon wrote: Fon Revedhort wrote: In fact, there are NO reasons to avoid making BOTH active armour and active shield tanking EQUALLY VIABLE. Couldn't agree more. They just need to be "different" at the same time. Right, but qui...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 11:26:00
|
400. Inferno Armour Repairer? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Cpt Branko wrote: Takeshi Yamato wrote: Quote: Yes, that's why there were active tanked Cyclones, Sleipnirs and Maelstroms I think the reason why these work is that an oversized shield booster + the ship's boost amount bonus gives a ve...
- by Fon Revedhort - at 2012.07.17 09:06:00
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [20] 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |