| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 |
1. Capital jump drive issues - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Let it go man. Let it go.
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.07.31 13:56:00
|
2. supercaps for carebears - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I can see why you think a pve supercarrier is a good idea now. Your brain works in interesting ways.
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.07.05 15:27:00
|
3. supercaps for carebears - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
We already went over that. AFK cloaking. Its surprisingly effective. Note the amount of threads that pop up crying about it. As for, neutral cloakers in high sec....thats a lot of :effort: and I'm willing to bet that its rarely used. The fact is ...
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.07.05 14:59:00
|
4. supercaps for carebears - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Did I say high sec players need to use local? No. I said they need to be active. You know. See that gang of thrashers warp in. Have a tank fit. Be aligned, ready to leave. But the vast majority don't do this. Thus the "risk." Thats not really r...
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.07.05 14:34:00
|
5. supercaps for carebears - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
TotalCareBear wrote: Tell me, how players make 0.0 safe? Don't game mechanics do that... and by that I mean local. There is no counter to local. I don't know if you've noticed, but theres a new tear thread about afk cloaking that pops up...
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.07.05 13:33:00
|
6. supercaps for carebears - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
TotalCareBear wrote: Having more content for PvErs is obviously a good thing, regardless of what the 0.0 carebears say. Not really. This is a pvp game. More pve content (lol shooting red crosses and stationary rocks, how is this enjoyable...
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.07.05 13:05:00
|
7. supercaps for carebears - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
TotalCareBear wrote: Tedious is not hard. Mining in a hulk in highsec is more dangerous than 0.0. Highend Maradeurs/Faction BS are just as safe in 0.0 as they are in highsec. Null sec is safe because players make it safe. High sec miners ...
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.07.05 13:01:00
|
8. T3 Industrial Cruiser - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Bump for the weekend.
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.23 12:19:00
|
9. Prevent Cynoing in within dock range.. - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
The only safe way to cyno with this method would be to the edge of a POS, thus my statement that travel routes would thus need POS towers. POS towers cost money and maintenance (fuel). I'm not exactly opposed to this idea. But I think you underes...
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.22 19:28:00
|
10. Prevent Cynoing in within dock range.. - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
So, you want us to need to either have safe towers along all cyno routes or to have escort fleets. Okay. Enjoy the massive increase in T2 prices.
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.22 18:11:00
|
11. T3 Industrial Cruiser - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I'm tempted to remove the mercoxit bay, ore bay and gas chamber bonuses from the industrial subsystems, and create a generic ore bay propulsion subsystem and a gas chamber subsystem. Thoughts?
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.22 11:44:00
|
12. T3 Industrial Cruiser - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Hmm....Looking back I'd actually agree that the velocity and agility subsystems really have no purpose other than adding a low slot. I'll look into these two. As for the other two: Interdiction Nullifier: pretty evident why this is useful Hull ...
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.22 11:39:00
|
13. Moon Mining - A new fresh look? - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
No. With that said, I'd be okay with Moon Harvesters needing to be outside of a POS, i.e. able to be incapped like a jump bridge or cynojammer.
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.21 18:05:00
|
14. Dynamic PvE reward depending on the current risk in any solar system - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Yeah there's no way this could possibly be abused.
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.21 14:29:00
|
15. New Sisters of Eve salvager/codebreaker/analyzer modules - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Looks good.
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.21 11:57:00
|
16. T3 Industrial Cruiser - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
With that said, I initially skipped to your tl;dr, was intrigued, read your post, and was amused. Very entertaining post.
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.21 00:18:00
|
17. T3 Industrial Cruiser - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
In all the times I've killed hulks in wh space, none have ever had warp core stabs. I disagree entirely that being able to bubble them would be the only way to kill them. You're assuming two things here: 1. that people fit WCS and 2. that people w...
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.21 00:12:00
|
18. T3 Industrial Cruiser - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Bump away.
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.20 13:41:00
|
19. New Scanning Probe implimentation - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
4 days later, this idea is still bad, who'd have thought?
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.19 11:17:00
|
20. T3 Industrial Cruiser - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: I underlined what you missed, and I refuse to continue this discussion because it is beneath me. If you want to stop driving people away from debating with you, perhaps you should focus more energy on listening to wha...
- by Liliana Rahl - at 2012.06.19 02:23:00
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |