| Pages: [1] 2 |
1. My way around bounty exploitation (Bounty Missions) - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
This is a nice idea. I also think that the security hit taken by "killing" the target should be diminished somehow.
- by Sunborne - at 2008.01.12 07:21:00
|
2. Change "Approach" to "Align-to" when out of Approach Range! - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: Sunborne on 19/08/2007 06:08:07 Do it already! This is one of those things that can be done in half an hour.
- by Sunborne - at 2007.08.19 06:06:00
|
3. Changing EVE combat. What needs to be done. - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: Valandril i stopped reading after point no 1 You should have read ahead there are some interesting changes, or do you think current mechanics are flawless? 1. No. 2. No. 3. No. 4. No, big guns should be used mainly fo...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.08.04 09:37:00
|
4. Mining upgrade part II - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: Sunborne on 28/07/2007 16:52:23 Love it, just love it. Any interaction like this, would make macroers and farmers job more difficult. Plus it would add the much needed fun part to mining. I don't mind changing crystals more often....
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.28 16:50:00
|
5. Energy Transfer Overload Device - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
The only way to fix the nos "problem" is to change it's characteristics. How many people do you think will sacrifice a high slot to use an anti-nos module hoping that they will maybe have the opportunity to use it?
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.27 18:47:00
|
6. New ship type: Q-boat - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: Sunborne on 26/07/2007 12:00:09 I want one. Do you take orders? Of course they should appear in overview as industrials. They would be the recon ships deadly adversaries. /signed
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.26 11:53:00
|
7. Macro mining twarting with a few minor UI tweaks - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: Jurgen Cartis Edited by: Jurgen Cartis on 25/07/2007 07:57:28 I think it will annoy the hell out of legit players. When you do X regularly (like clicking something in a menu) you do it with less thought. On the menu f...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.25 08:34:00
|
8. Higher Monthly Charge to be able to train more then one charater - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: TomParad0x Originally by: Kempeth The reason why you would want to train a second char is either to play it or to sell it. If you wan't to play it then you might just as well go with the second account. If you want ...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.24 15:14:00
|
9. Disgusted - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: Sunborne on 20/07/2007 15:26:17 I see it's no safe place from pirates, not even on forums. They are trying to gank you everywhere, lazy *******s. If there would be a working security system, so that they could be hunted too, I...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.20 15:25:00
|
10. Grid Loading on Jump Through - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: Sunborne on 14/07/2007 06:17:46 The easiest fix would be a sync between client and server. When the client is ready to display the grid it signals the server. Only at this point the server should make you visible to the others. Thi...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.14 06:17:00
|
11. LVL 5 skills - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
That would be nice.
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.14 05:55:00
|
12. Changing Local - Local Sensor Network - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Originally by: Ricky Baby so you want a system to keep you hidden while ratting, yet still want it to show any hostile as they arrive (jump in) either leave local as it is or remove it completely. - local is still biased against pirates/r...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.14 05:46:00
|
13. Changing Local - Local Sensor Network - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: Sunborne on 13/07/2007 18:00:16 Love the idea. The players showing up when near a gate or a station, means that ppl in the system get alerted when something bad is coming in. The only problem I see is when somebody d/cted in a far ...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.13 17:57:00
|
14. Solid POS shield - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: Sunborne on 13/07/2007 07:43:42 And make a covert ops module that would require hacking skill, to analize the structures inside. That would be nice.
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.13 07:42:00
|
15. poteque implants - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
I found exploration implants at agents working for Quaffe Company.
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.12 13:09:00
|
16. Pirates and Anti-Pirates - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: Sunborne on 12/07/2007 06:16:29 Originally by: Aziz Hekato But would this solve Player versus Player? The way I see it, this will only fix your security standing, am I right? I don't see why fixing the security standin...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.12 06:15:00
|
17. Pirates and Anti-Pirates - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: Sunborne on 11/07/2007 08:15:43 Originally by: vinnymcg I really like this idea as it makes many more targets, but the no security increase for ratting in 0.0 is a stupid statment. Of course killing rats in 0.0 is helping e...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.11 08:15:00
|
18. Pirates and Anti-Pirates - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Edited by: Sunborne on 10/07/2007 09:02:30 Yeah, nobody should be allowed to attack in hi-sec, without CONCORD reprisal. If pirates will be forced to rat in empire I think they'll think twice before attacking somebody. I think that if this is ...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.10 08:59:00
|
19. Pirates and Anti-Pirates - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Many systems have been proposed. I hope CCP read them and is working on something. The current system were players can attack other players in low and then go in 0.0 to rat thus increasing their security status is wrong. 0.0 has nothing to do wi...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.10 08:10:00
|
20. Concord Policy Change Idea - Distress Beacon, High-Low sec responses - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I think the respond time percents in hi-sec should not go below 70% and the cycle time should be reduced to 10 sec. 20 seconds is be too much for a inndy waiting for help. Also the lo-sec percents should be below 20% with the cycle 20 seconds. ...
- by Sunborne - at 2007.07.10 07:28:00
|
| Pages: [1] 2 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |