Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 |
1. Sticky:CSM X - Summit II - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Akrasjel Lanate wrote: Summit Minutes won't take long Moving back to a multi month minute release to help stretch out the anticipation.
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2016.02.13 02:28:56
|
2. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Anchoring Discussion - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Oreb Wing wrote: vov It's eve. We like to make people lose things.. Besides. I still think the proliferation of these things is a detriment to FW, in that it introduces a foreign structure that completely ***** on home field advantages. Why sh...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.11.15 18:41:30
|
3. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Bonuses - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
LP taxes to corporations and alliances have been discussed with CCP. Both will require an extensive rework of the lp store and lp distribution system. While that would be lovely, and the current state of the LP store has been extensively discussed...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.11.02 15:24:25
|
4. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Bonuses - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Bienator II wrote: if ccp decides to give structures a FW bonus please make sure that it only applies to structures whose owner is in FW. Last time this could not be done because of legacy code but luckily the structures are all new code now. ...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.11.02 15:20:26
|
5. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Anchoring Discussion - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
May Arethusa wrote: By limiting L and XL citadels, we retain the ability to use mediums and smalls as FOBs for system pushes, and provide corporations and alliances with an official home along with significant benefits for holding onto it. ...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.11.02 15:19:10
|
6. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Anchoring Discussion - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Oreb Wing wrote: Sugar Kyle wrote: Oreb Wing wrote: Have them become the structure hub we have to destroy for occupancy to trade hands. This would limit how many there will be and how central they are, or when they can become vulnerable t...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.11.02 15:17:32
|
7. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Anchoring Discussion - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Oreb Wing wrote: Have them become the structure hub we have to destroy for occupancy to trade hands. This would limit how many there will be and how central they are, or when they can become vulnerable to attack. I did not read anything on wher...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.11.02 05:24:20
|
8. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Bonuses - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Hi again, The structure revamp is well on its way and we are looking to see Citadel enter the game next year. I'd like your thoughts on a few things regarding potential bonuses that could be connected to warzone control. (I am writing a separate...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.11.02 02:14:49
|
9. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Anchoring Discussion - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Hi some more, The structure revamp is well on its way and we are looking to see Citadel enter the game next year. I'd like your thoughts on a few things regarding anchoring and warzone control. (I am writing a separate post to discuss Citadel bo...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.11.02 02:09:14
|
10. Cargoholds, Ships, and Capital SMAs - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Removing some of the SMA restrictions came up at the round table in Vegas. We'll continue to follow up with it and I am sure that it will come up again as part of the Capital Focus Group that CCP Larrikin is creating. Removing the contraband rest...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.10.31 05:26:08
|
11. Sticky:Dev Blog: Exploring The Character Bazaar & Skill Trading - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Can't say I like it. Ive been against it since it was presented. This is supposed to be a predecision discussion as I have understood it. Please make your opinions known.
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.10.15 15:28:31
|
12. In Response to Sugar Kyle - Highsec development - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Anize Oramara wrote: (...) PvE players don't want to PvP or they would be PvPing. (...) Exactly. And yet when CCP adds new PvE (Burners) they do so in ways that would force PvErs to PvP (wormholes, lowsec...)...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.10.07 15:20:05
|
13. In Response to Sugar Kyle - Highsec development - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Liberty Belle wrote: How about fixing the god awful corp interaction/permissions as soon as possible? How about expanding ways to collaborate both in corp and with individuals? There are plenty of opportunities being held back, particularly ind...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.10.07 12:58:08
|
14. In Response to Sugar Kyle - Highsec development - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
I'm the one who wrote the blog that spawned the thread so I guess I'll chime in with the original goal. I stepped back from the whats and whos of ganking and this space and that space and this nerf and that buff and simply wanted to know what is ...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.10.07 02:53:43
|
15. In Response to Sugar Kyle - Highsec development - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Thanatos Marathon wrote: Increase the strength of the faction police to help protect nubbin FW pilots. Reduce incursion payouts by 50% and replace that faucet somewhere else in game. Working towards that goal.
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.10.06 18:17:58
|
16. Sticky:Data Site Improvements - in Missions & Complexes [original thread]
The modules are being rebalanced as they go through the sets they belong to.
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.10.04 00:47:55
|
17. Sticky:Data Site Improvements - in Missions & Complexes [original thread]
Muahhaha! Aww yisss
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.10.02 18:02:20
|
18. Announcement:CSMX - SUMMIT I - in Assembly Hall [original thread]
Freelancer117 wrote: Monday: Meeting with CCPGÇÖs CEO One would expect a meeting with CCP games lead game designer and / or executive producer since they are the ones that are more closely tight into the games development, or does the current...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.09.02 17:31:46
|
19. Stepping into Faction Warfare - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Thank you for all the thoughts and feedback. Now I get to do the glamorous job of pouring this all into a singular document for CCP. :)
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.09.01 16:21:16
|
20. Stepping into Faction Warfare - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Silverbackyererse wrote: Good luck with this mate. And congratulations on getting what I reckon is the first and only sticky I've ever seen in this section of the forums. What do CCP envisage for a FW newbie? Hopefully it's not the quadruple...
- by Sugar Kyle - at 2015.08.22 06:14:09
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |