Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 20 |
161. One kid takes out enitre alliance instantly, sorry CCP but you fail - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: Feral Lady In the larger sense, CCP are careless game designers for constructing an interface that lets this happen. No vote, no cooling off period, nothing. Pathetic Wrong. Copy and paste my reply from your other post.
- by GateScout - at 2009.02.05 17:30:00
|
162. To Bob Members! - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: Feral Lady In the larger sense, CCP are careless game designers for constructing an interface that lets this happen. No vote, no cooling off period, nothing. Pathetic Nanny state now! Protect us from our own actions! CC...
- by GateScout - at 2009.02.05 17:29:00
|
163. Unintended use of game mechanics - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: GateScout on 05/02/2009 17:15:28 You have it wrong. A (at the time) BoB Director with the appropriate and required authority utilized his roles to disband an alliance via kicking corps from said alliance. This is a designed g...
- by GateScout - at 2009.02.05 17:14:00
|
164. One kid takes out enitre alliance instantly, sorry CCP but you fail - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Somehow this is a bad thing? Hardly. What awesome dynamics and a fantastic, rapidly changing world! The fact that 1 person ( with the appropriate authority ) can disband an alliance only highlights the need for compartmentalization not game c...
- by GateScout - at 2009.02.05 16:57:00
|
165. Proposed Falcon Nerf - Trying not to go overboard. - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Edited by: GateScout on 30/01/2009 20:12:13 Originally by: Ryoken McKeon Thoughts? Flames? Please die you're an idiot? Make the falcon and ECM modules more like other recons. As a falcon pilot, I'd love that. ...but it'll never happ...
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.30 20:12:00
|
166. Cloaking - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
1. Force cloaks to use some sort of fuel. 2. Allow cloakers to be probed down (albeit difficult). Problem solved. Cloaks still work as intended, yet cannot be abused.
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.30 20:10:00
|
167. New Dev Blog: Sic Itur Ad Astra - Building a New Bridge to the Stars - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Originally by: tropic89 he then takes his raven and disapears into oblivion ratting his isk for the isk selling company How, exactly, is he gaining isk? Ratting for isk comes from bounties. Are their bounties in W-Space? Probably not. ...
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.30 20:06:00
|
168. Caldari E-War Ships - Only ones worth it? - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Originally by: Lucia Wilber Gallente: Warp Scramblers and Sensor Dampeners While I think the falcon is an great, all-around ship, I find a lot of use to have 1 or more arazus in gang. With the larger gate radius its scramblers are a wel...
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.28 19:32:00
|
169. New Dev Blog: Sic Itur Ad Astra - Building a New Bridge to the Stars - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Originally by: permion Yes. and there will be rewards in W-space exploration sites that can't be gotten without using the exploration sites and have resources unique to W-space. And yes they will be harder than K-space exploration sites a...
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.27 22:22:00
|
170. New Dev Blog: Sic Itur Ad Astra - Building a New Bridge to the Stars - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Originally by: An Anarchyyt Not understanding that more intuitive != easier Ridiculous speculation, based on god only knows what. A product of horrible reading comprehension [/list] ....and yet nothing you posted refutes his con...
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.27 21:26:00
|
171. New Dev Blog: Sic Itur Ad Astra - Building a New Bridge to the Stars - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Question: Will there be exploration sites within W-Space?
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.27 21:24:00
|
172. Ecm Jamming Chance and Bayesian Probability - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Originally by: chrisss0r So the real probability of beeing permajammed by a falcon for 2 minutes in the situation the model is seeted in is more than twice as high as the wrong and simple formula returns. Nice assumptions. Because ...
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.19 01:23:00
|
173. Hi End Mineral Drop - in Market Discussions [original thread]
The drone regions are quiet.
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.15 22:15:00
|
174. Humm, Falcons. - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Originally by: Warrio I thought Falcons were alright. Then I thought I actually go and try PvPing a bit. I see what you mean. It must be hard to suck that much. I feel for you.
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.14 17:14:00
|
175. Best Falcon killer? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
As with most things, it depends . Personally, my favorite anti-falcon ship is a cerb fit with heavy missiles and ECCM (missile flight time and velocity rigs are generally cheap and helpful) and allow you to hit out to 250km (more or less). Yo...
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.14 17:13:00
|
176. Suspected Mining Bot - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Considering the *constant* whining about Trit prices, you would expect half of the EvE population craving for MORE macro miners....
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.09 18:25:00
|
177. Eve Online: Apocrypha - in Science and Industry [original thread]
Industrial support = Tanking? Command Links? Scouting? ...a bit vague. Might be cool though.... Hopefully we'll see the patch go up on SiSi by the middle of February.
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.09 17:18:00
|
178. Suspected Mining Bot - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: JaseNZ Been talking with a few other miners I get along with in the system and they are starting to get annoyed at the actions of this player also. You mean mining without interacting with you? For all I know, you cou...
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.08 20:50:00
|
179. To ECCM I say... - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Edited by: GateScout on 06/01/2009 20:50:04 Originally by: Murina UNLESS I FOLLOWED YOUR PROGRESSION WRONG.......5 = 3.125, 6 = 1.5625...... Ahhhh.... You mean 1.56 % chance...NOT a probability of 1.56. That make a bit of a diff...
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.06 20:48:00
|
180. To ECCM I say... - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Originally by: Murina Its your math pal not mine. Actually, it's yours: Originally by: Murina Because a ship with 28 str has a 1.5625 chance of being "perma" jammed (or perma failed) for 6 cycles (6 cycles being you bench mark ...
- by GateScout - at 2009.01.06 20:43:00
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 20 |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |