| Pages: [1] |
1. [Suggestion] PC 2.0, What should happen in Space (EVE side) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I think the PC interface should be available in both games to Directors and Planetary Management Officers in the Corp that owns the District. I think that a Corp attacking or defending a district should be able to create a contract to hire Mercen...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2014.02.05 22:53:00
|
2. [Suggestion] PC 2.0, What should happen in Space (EVE side) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
One of the things I like about PI bonuses is that it gives benefits to individual pilots and small operations. It would be much easier for a DUST Corp to entice a small PVP gang to join up if the individual members got something out of it. It is a...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2014.02.05 18:27:00
|
3. [Suggestion] PC 2.0, What should happen in Space (EVE side) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Another PI Incentive Idea: What if a Planetary District acted as a Command Center for anyone in the Alliance, but did not count toward the total number of Command Centers that your Interplanetary Consolidation skill gives you? Then suppose that e...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2014.02.05 17:40:00
|
4. [Suggestion] PC 2.0, What should happen in Space (EVE side) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Ok, let me do some brainstorming on the incentives for EVE Alliances to care about Planetary Districts held by DUST players. The current bonuses are clearly not enough. For one thing they only apply to Corporations, when it would be better to ha...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2014.02.05 15:16:00
|
5. [Suggestion] PC 2.0, What should happen in Space (EVE side) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Ayures wrote: Where's the incentive for EVE players? I'm not seeing one. For EVE pilots to care there must be a significant benefit EVE side to your Alliance owning Planetary Districts. That would have to be part of Planetary Conquest 2.0. Th...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2014.02.04 21:46:00
|
6. [Suggestion] PC 2.0, What should happen in Space (EVE side) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Here is a link to the discussion on the DUST 514 forum. In Planetary Conquest 2.0 location should matter! Since the plan is for the Warbarge to travel to the planet, moving the Warbarge will have to be where the significance of location comes i...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2014.02.04 19:43:00
|
7. DonGÇÖt make the Ferox redundant please - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Verity Sovereign wrote: Caldari aren't supposed to use blasters... in terms of lore If they give it a damage and resist bonus... the Brutix is dead... Both would be blaster fit, with blaster damage bonus The active tank bonus on the Brutix wo...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.11.29 18:07:00
|
8. DonGÇÖt make the Ferox redundant please - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Harvey James wrote: Joe Risalo wrote: Harvey James wrote: well considering the drake will lose its resist bonus for a ROF most likely and less EHP and prob lose a mid i would say it won't be a brawler more of a kiter. I don't think th...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.11.28 20:30:00
|
9. DonGÇÖt make the Ferox redundant please - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Joe Risalo wrote: One thing that I feel is going unnoticed is that in making the Ferox a brawler you're making it redundant. Not only are you limiting its effectiveness to close range, but I also feel you're forgetting about the upcoming missi...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.11.28 20:21:00
|
10. DonGÇÖt make the Ferox redundant please - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Yes, I would like it to be a bit faster in order to get into range to use Blasters. It was originally intended to use rail guns, which have enough range that speed was not needed. It is currently the same speed as the Drake. The Drake can be stand...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.11.28 18:44:00
|
11. DonGÇÖt make the Ferox redundant please - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
The options I prefer, in order of preference, for balancing the Ferox are as follows: Option 1: Add a mid slot (for more utility), make it faster, keep bonuses the same. Option 2: Add a High slot and a turret hard point, make it faster, keep bonu...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.11.28 17:08:00
|
12. DonGÇÖt make the Ferox redundant please - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Vayn Baxtor wrote: Depends. There is the "lore doctrine" and then the "game doctrine". I'm not sure which one is actually pursued. I doubt it's the Caldari-lore one. In this case, it's better to go for the sake of Ferox' usability. Got to ma...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.11.28 16:32:00
|
13. DonGÇÖt make the Ferox redundant please - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
If they add a low slot and remove the resistance bonus, then people will start armour tanking it, and that hardly follows Caldari doctrine either. Then we can call the Ferox the Caldari Hurricane. I would not object to keeping the current bonuses...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.11.28 14:47:00
|
14. DonGÇÖt make the Ferox redundant please - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Brawling may not be CaldariGÇÖs preferred fighting style, but even they should concede that there is a need for a shield tanked brawler for breaking gate camps and such. Also, the Basilisk is best suited to support a shield brawler fleet, as it is...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.11.27 20:14:00
|
15. DonGÇÖt make the Ferox redundant please - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Quote: Ferox: we would like to reinforce the sniping nature of this ship, most likely by replacing the shield resistance bonus with a hybrid damage bonus. Nothing is set in stone yet, as we need to find ways to ensure it doesnGÇÖt compete with ...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.11.27 16:35:00
|
16. Sticky:[Winter] New destroyers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Cerulean Ice wrote: snow plow attached to brick... http://www.tentonhammer.com/image/view/236986/_original My eyes X_X Why can't the minmatar dessy look as awesome as the caldari and gallente dessies? :( More like a Snowplow attached to ...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.10.05 12:58:00
|
17. Sticky:[Winter] New destroyers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
http://themittani.com/media/new-tempest-and-gallente-destroyer-renders For a ship that is designed to zip around the battlefield, the new Minmatar Destroyer looks an awfully lot like a barge. Assuming the above link is accurate. If it had some ...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.10.04 14:26:00
|
18. Sticky:[Winter] New destroyers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
.
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.10.02 19:45:00
|
19. Sticky:[Winter] Logistics Frigates - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Jame Jarl Retief wrote: My immediate gut reaction was "Well Done!", this certainly has the potential to shake up frigate combat and introduce some very fun mechanics into smaller hull combat. Needs testing though. One concern I have is that th...
- by Renier Gaden - at 2012.09.12 15:10:00
|
| Pages: [1] |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |