| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 |
1. Improvement for highsec wardec system - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Moonlit Raid wrote: If people were interested in this they'd just create 1 man corps. I don't think this will change anything. I'm not seeing the "safaries" as the main part, only a small number of people would probably do that. The main poi...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2017.06.11 10:02:11
|
2. Little things / Small QoL suggestions - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Sally Clay wrote: Hi! On TEST server i see you remove Advanced Audio Settings. Pls don't do this! If this is not used (in your opinion) then it does not mean that you need to clean it up. Make checkbox, let the players choose Adv. sett. VS S...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2017.05.07 05:18:50
|
3. Nullification and Interdiction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Sullen Decimus wrote: Now that we have decaying bubbles I want to reopen this forum. here are some general view points. - having nullified travel isn't a bad thing. We recommended having shuttles with nullification as they would still allow e...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2017.03.20 12:54:45
|
4. Improvement for highsec wardec system - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
The restriction to the defending side should eliminate most if not all abusive cases. For mutual wars, the feature is open to both sides (maybe with an additional cooldown before switching sides). This would also allow for easy weekend warriors in...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2017.03.20 11:55:56
|
5. Improvement for highsec wardec system - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Just want to throw that very simple idea and ultimate solution to all wardec issues into the pool. Make it so, every individual can join a war on the defending side upon invitation for free without leaving their current corp (similar to a fleet...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2017.03.13 16:18:47
|
6. Nullification and Interdiction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I'm fine with the nullification ecosystem, there needs to be only some tweaks to anchorable bubbles, namely: 1. make them generate a killmail 2. 10x their cost 3. lower their HP Done.
- by Tipa Riot - at 2017.02.01 21:14:16
|
7. Invulnerability License - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I like this idea of an "anti-PvP" license, excluding people from every PvP. Of course this means, they can only ever trade and exchange stuff with NPC, and the great portfolio they offer. Every player-made item will be confiscated upon activation ...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2017.01.08 07:42:28
|
8. Sticky:[Focus Group] Tactical Destroyers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Two things I'm really not happy with ... What is the reasoning to keep Jackdaw's and Hecate's effortless instawarp capability while you remove the mode-switch trick from Confessor and Svipul? Also the new ewar resistence bonus is rather useless.
- by Tipa Riot - at 2016.10.26 14:14:25
|
9. I would love to have an option to split my overview - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
+1 I expierienced more than one sudden explosion, because tabbing around on my overview. My loot tab does not contain ships and warpables ...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2016.10.03 19:53:53
|
10. Sticky:[Focus Group] Tactical Destroyers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
After some thoughts, my proposed additions - compensate for the removal of the mode-switch-trick for Svipul and Confessor with an improved bonus to agility, but make it so, it only brings it down to instawarp with at least one nanofiber fitted (c...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2016.09.13 10:47:44
|
11. Sticky:[Focus Group] Tactical Destroyers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
For those not following the logs, here are the discussed T3D / Svipul changes: https://focusgrouplogs.tech.ccp.is/tactical-destroyers/2016-09-11/
All the proposed nerfs are in ... big nerf hammer ... have to think about the consequences.
- by Tipa Riot - at 2016.09.13 08:32:12
|
12. Site Clouds/Gas/etc - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
The performance with clouds was wrecked after the last patch, its a general problem ... please open a bug report to give CCP input for fixing. Thanks!
- by Tipa Riot - at 2016.09.01 11:49:58
|
13. Sticky:[Focus Group] Tactical Destroyers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
... one thing, please keep the base speed push in prop mode for Svipul and Confessor. Because it gives you game play options -> GTFO when scrammed if skilled and the instawarp trick (which needs also some player skill and focus). The Hecate is ...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2016.09.01 11:35:24
|
14. Mutli-Use Analyzers Feedback Thread - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Steve Ronuken wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Who's brilliant idea was it to make the blueprint for a Zeugma worthless and the built a loss? Uh, The players who decide it's not worth buying at a price which would make it buildable at a profit? ...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2016.07.24 18:01:18
|
15. Mutli-Use Analyzers Feedback Thread - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Who's brilliant idea was it to make the blueprint for a Zeugma worthless and the built a loss?
- by Tipa Riot - at 2016.07.24 15:38:36
|
16. Mutli-Use Analyzers Feedback Thread - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Interesting tweak with the slots, still think it will be a niche product. I don't want to sacrifice efficiency on relic sites just to be able to also run data sites.
- by Tipa Riot - at 2016.05.13 14:06:43
|
17. Mutli-Use Analyzers Feedback Thread - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
As a ceptor explorer I need to max out my strength because of the non-bonused hull, so I wouldn't use a module with lower strength. Anyway it's too expensive for a 30m ship and there are not many situations where I would need both analyzers as I'm...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2016.04.25 14:58:11
|
18. The Problem With Entirely Removing Off-Grid Links - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
The main reason why OGB are bad is, that no single player would ever play that role, it's an alt only game play. Every role in fleets should be fun and worth playing by an actual person, preferable with better performance than multiboxing an alt. ...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2015.12.25 11:15:30
|
19. Adjustment to mission paymix, proposal - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
With 2/3 or more of the mission value in loot and salvage, you have to put some effort in its protection from thieves; that's the main point. The removal of blitzing is more a side effect than a goal. But it may open up for more complex, randomize...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2015.12.24 19:06:18
|
20. Adjustment to mission paymix, proposal - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
When thinking about complains regarding crappy loot drops in missions and what the two events made successful (e.g. competition), what if shifting ISK rewards much more to lootable stuff? So instead of bounties, have tags and instead of mission re...
- by Tipa Riot - at 2015.12.24 11:21:39
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |