| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
1. Making Wormholes easier to Probe. - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I agree that making WHs easier to scan down isn't going to increase the amount of traffic in w-space, encouraging new players it might but unless there is something new in w-space for the more experienced then this wont do anything. However in sa...
- by Humang - at 2015.09.16 10:27:11
|
2. Missile Damage Lock Discussion - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I can agree, seems silly to restrict a weapon system that is by design intended to be flexible to the situation. Particulate fond of the last point in the OP, that of the split damage concept.
- by Humang - at 2015.09.12 05:56:46
|
3. Cloaky Camper Idea - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Death Ryder wrote: so in short your not allowed to discuss cloaky campers unless your thrown in with the rest of the ideas and ignored.. that's pretty unfair, if theres a lot of discussions about cloakies means its something that is so obviousl...
- by Humang - at 2015.09.12 05:37:54
|
4. Sticky:[Vanguard] Combat and Navy BC Rebalance - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
All looks good to me, and looking forward to playing around with them. Chiming in on the damage lock for the drake discussion, I would bring up the old idea ( can't remember who brought it up ) that the damage bonus simply adds bonus kinetic dama...
- by Humang - at 2015.09.12 02:24:01
|
5. AB/MWD Effects - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
They were showing off ship thruster effects at the last fanfest, though there wasn't much more detail than pretty pictures/video. So something might already be in the works, but then again it might be seen as giving away to much information for fr...
- by Humang - at 2015.06.21 13:25:03
|
6. A balancing thought on Strategic Cruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I could get behind this idea, and it does make a funny kind of sense with the T3 destroyers. It would help justify the advantages - in terms of capability - they have over T1 and T2 cruiser hulls ( Tank, DPS, Utility ) and it would shake up the m...
- by Humang - at 2015.06.21 13:16:16
|
7. SKINS we'd like to see: - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Most definitely been suggested before, but my vote is for purchasable color pallets. ie. Still need to purchase a skin "licence" for a hull, but it just allows you to customize it.
You then buy individual colors ( or a bunch for a deal )
...
- by Humang - at 2015.05.22 16:31:37
|
8. Inconsistencies in the consequences of shooting hisec deployables - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Sorry, I meant to say I agree that there is an issue of inconsistency. Jennifer en Marland wrote: The first problem with this is, this seems like a needless exception to a relatively simple rule - the rule being 'in hisec, going criminal is acc...
- by Humang - at 2015.04.30 08:10:49
|
9. Inconsistencies in the consequences of shooting hisec deployables - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I can support this. Consequence is enough that once you attack a deployable that is not your own, you are free game to anyone in system. Kill-rights should be restricted to aggression of the individual only in my opinion.
- by Humang - at 2015.04.29 22:09:34
|
10. Can I entosis an inactive pos? - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
When they remove the restriction of being limited to anchoring at a moon, every POS that was just anchored there to take up the space will be rendered pointless. IMO if the owner is to lazy to scoop them back up then they also wont care if someon...
- by Humang - at 2015.04.26 06:37:42
|
11. [Scylla] Beta Map Release - feedback wanted! - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
When the map is "docked" to the left or right of the screen, would it be possible to not have it modify the cameras position in the game?
- by Humang - at 2015.04.23 15:48:36
|
12. Sticky:[New structures] Observatory Arrays and Gates - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I agree with the above.
- by Humang - at 2015.04.11 15:19:16
|
13. Sticky:[New structures] Observatory Arrays and Gates - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Dictateur Imperator wrote: In fact with this structure you have more risk : You can loose the structure, the reward is : you can find perma cloacker. Actually what is the RISK for a perma cloacker ? Adding to the game the OA is not reducin...
- by Humang - at 2015.04.06 12:16:18
|
14. Sticky:[New structures] Observatory Arrays and Gates - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I should clarify a bit more. What I intended was to build off EVE's risk vs reward style, where if you reduce the risk, you reduce the reward. If someone wants to secure themselves from cloaking ships, then they should pay a price for that secur...
- by Humang - at 2015.04.05 01:44:34
|
15. New Structures and NPC industrial goods - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
All I can think of is "How would this bring something new to EVE" other than its something else the the cargo-hold of the PI haulers that I blow up in w-space? I don't mean to be harsh, I just think you need to add some more detail/substance to y...
- by Humang - at 2015.04.04 14:18:17
|
16. Bringing back deep space and true exploration - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
The biggest thing I see is who is going to do the work to support this? It may sound simple but there is still a lot of background work that wold need to be done, to stat and maintain it, which would probably mean taking resources from other proje...
- by Humang - at 2015.04.04 14:11:48
|
17. Sticky:[New structures] Observatory Arrays and Gates - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I can't say anything for nullsec, but what theses structures mean for w-space is something I am really interested in, but I'ld like to focus on the observation array. While I don't think ( and hope ) that gates will be applicable to w-space, I ca...
- by Humang - at 2015.04.04 13:33:58
|
18. Make battleships and battlecruisers worth the warp! 2.0 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I agree with the more DPS & TANK for battleships opinion, and I really like the overheat role bonus in there just a flat bonus to overheat amount/duration or some kind of racial alignment. It is kind of silly that in most instances its better...
- by Humang - at 2015.04.04 10:42:32
|
19. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance Part 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Dr Farallon wrote: And 1 strontium is way too low. Maybe 10 or 25 per cycle. If you're gonna do 1 you might as well do none at all. I agree with this, in that it should be removed altogether, It seems like a requirement that would be more if...
- by Humang - at 2015.04.02 04:58:01
|
20. Utility Battle Ships: using deployable structures dyanimcly - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
This is the much shorter follow-up second-half of my first thread here - - - This one is a much more simple ( and vague ) idea to throw around and to see what feedback is like. Following on from the theme of creating a T2 role for hulls witho...
- by Humang - at 2015.03.23 13:29:13
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |