| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
1. Drakes - Do they need a nerf? - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington Thanks for letting us know in advance you have no idea what you're talking about. You don't passive tank Drakes for PVP. Those fits you linked, along with passive Drakes in general, are mission shi...
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2010.11.08 00:26:00
|
2. Drakes - Do they need a nerf? - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: Val MeR Wall of text. The drake is NOT overpowered. It just abuses a system that is already broken. -----
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2010.11.07 04:33:00
|
3. Drakes - Do they need a nerf? - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: davet517 Which is why everybody passive shield tanks, and almost nobody armor tanks? It's not that armor tanking doesn't work, it's the fact that passive shield tanking works better, even on some armor tanking specific ...
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2010.11.07 03:04:00
|
4. Drakes - Do they need a nerf? - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Drakes aren't the problem, it's passive shield tanking that the issue. It's unbalanced vs every other form of tanking. Some examples: http://eve.battleclinic.com/loadout/2066-PASSIVECANE.html http://eve.battleclinic.com/loadout/4657-Passive-Sh...
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2010.11.07 02:05:00
|
5. Bwahahha! goodbye isk farmers! (article link) - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Andreya, you always were an a**hole
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2009.01.18 14:05:00
|
6. People are cheating on Eve till Eve - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: Ex0101 Anyone thats bothered about hours on xfire just leaves there favourite game minimized all the time anyway to look '1337' Clocking hours on xfire is nothing new This, to be honest. Just leave xfire and Eve running...
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.12.19 14:22:00
|
7. [VOTE] All AGAINST The Nano-Nerf - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
I agree with this topic -----
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.10.05 14:13:00
|
8. [VOTE] All AGAINST The Nano-Nerf - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
I agree with this topic -----
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.10.05 14:13:00
|
9. [Idea] High-Sec PVP should be opt-in only. Also, give us dueling mode! - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
please ccp. this univited pvp must stop!111!!1 seriously, all i want to do is spin my ship outside and not in station!!!!11!!!! -----
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.08.07 12:36:00
|
10. [ISSUE]Game direction and recent changes - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
I highly doubt CCP will even respond. It's rather obvious they don't really care at all. -----
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.08.07 12:32:00
|
11. [Issue] Covert cynos should bypass cynosular jammers - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
I will throw my vote this way *toss* -----
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.08.02 12:12:00
|
12. Nerf is actually quite bad.... - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
I think the OP is another Nano Whiner alt just trying to make nano's look rediculous. A very small percentage of nano fliers have HG Snakes and very little nano gangs have full LVL5 Spec Warfare-linked with implants Claymore pilots. In fact, very ...
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.08.02 12:03:00
|
13. [VOTE] All AGAINST The Nano-Nerf - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: DasDizzy Adapt or die you ****tards - Brought you by people who failed to adapt to nanos TRUTH!
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.08.02 02:48:00
|
14. Open letter to CCP - a serious response to the nano changes - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus You have it the wrong way around. Nano noobs are 'Starcraft', 'traditional' players (everyone else) are 'Total Annihilation' players who are intent on playing the game with it's full range of ships and weapons...
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.07.31 12:15:00
|
15. Open letter to CCP - a serious response to the nano changes - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Edited by: Pheonix Kanan on 31/07/2008 12:15:26 I agree with you entirely. Unfortunately, as I have stated to many fellow eve players, CCP has a past history of over-nerfing (Nos, Damps, Carriers, for example). And there current eve community ...
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.07.31 12:12:00
|
16. Armour or SHield Tanked Vaga? - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Originally by: Trojanman190 Originally by: Mr Ignitious Originally by: Reem Fairchild Judging from what's in the dev blog, it should still be able to (at the very least) go above 4 km/s with just tech 2 speed fittings. And ...
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.07.28 17:01:00
|
17. Nerf Nano? Buff Missiles Instead - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Originally by: Wil Smithx Dude wtf are you even talking about, was what you said even related to my post?! From what I can gather the only bit that was, was your worthless comment about missiles and on that subject; minmatar and amarr ha...
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.07.28 16:59:00
|
18. Nerf Nano? Buff Missiles Instead - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Originally by: Wil Smithx They're not being removed you ****tard, they're being ballanced so they fit in with the rest of the game, and buffing missiles only solves the problem of naano for caldari, you tunnel visioned knob! Edit: Decide...
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.07.28 16:28:00
|
19. Nerf Nano? Buff Missiles Instead - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Edited by: Pheonix Kanan on 28/07/2008 15:09:55 -----
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.07.28 15:10:00
|
20. Nerf Nano? Buff Missiles Instead - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Edited by: Pheonix Kanan on 28/07/2008 15:10:08 Originally by: Wil Smithx *Slap* - nano is broken and will still funtion after patch, this thread is irrelavent because nanos travel so much faster than missiles atm that they wouldnt hu...
- by Pheonix Kanan - at 2008.07.28 15:07:00
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |