| Pages: [1] 2 3 |
1. T2 Command Battleships - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Danika Princip wrote: Not only to bombers. To literally everything on the field. They wouldn't be able to receive remote reps, and it'd take time for them to reconfigure, so they'd be dead ~20 seconds after they hit siege. As for bringing fri...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.09.08 15:44:00
|
2. T2 Command Battleships - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Arthur Aihaken wrote: T3 Flagships... I got chills when I read that. :) Perhaps a T3 Flagship .... or Command Battleship could be very much like a carrier, except that there are no fighters or bombers. Just room for a couple of support fl...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.09.08 15:30:00
|
3. T2 Command Battleships - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Danika Princip wrote: And unless they could tank tens of thousands of DPS, they would be destroyed almost immediately. A fleet that isn't moving would be bombed out of existence in short order. Yes. They would be vulnerable to Stealth Bombe...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.09.08 15:27:00
|
4. T2 Command Battleships - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
With all of the talk about Mauraders having Bastion mode, etc ... A siege mode makes no sense for Mauraders, but it would be an EXCELLENT idea for a Command Battleship ... A base of operations for Incursions, low/null sec fleet battles with capi...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.09.08 04:12:00
|
5. Sticky:Import/export of settings! - How do you want it to work? - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Please, for the love of all things ... well, that blow up and go BOOM: 1. Eve should be runnable from an external hard drive, usb stick, etc, so we can get our "Neural Fix" wherever! Settings shouldn't have to be redone in this situation. 2. Eve...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.09.08 04:01:00
|
6. Sticky:The 'one-line bad idea' thread - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Bad Idea: Mining Mini-Games
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.09.08 03:36:00
|
7. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Aglais wrote: Serious suggestion here. Not really. The Marauders require this module to be active in order to run their MWD for significant periods of time (Suggestion: give the Machariel a role bonus that massively decreases 100MN MWD use). ...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.31 00:28:00
|
8. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Joining the call for the Bastion Module to use Tactical Weapons Reconfig, like Siege Modules. I'm sure that your coders are capable of dealing with the small aspect of the fuel reduction on the skill not messing things up e...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 19:33:00
|
9. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Cade Windstalker wrote: First off, working with allies qualifies as effort. Maybe I should have been more specific but generally organizing people, grouping up, and working toward a common goal takes effort. Second, your idea has absolutely ...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 11:12:00
|
10. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Katrina Oniseki wrote: Thanks! CCP doesn't gift you free skills when they add them. CCP has also said nothing about making the new skill a requirement to fly the ship. It's required to use the module, but not the ship. Even if it is added ...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 04:29:00
|
11. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Ravasta Helugo wrote: Please explain that to me in more detail. Right now, using the Nightmare and Paladin as an example, the Nightmare has more applied DPS because of it's tracking bonus. However theoretical DPS of both ships is the same. ...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 04:18:00
|
12. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
The Standard Question: "If you can fly it now, will you be able to fly it later?" Assuming the answer is, "Yes" ... Will this new "Bastion" / "Tactical Weapon Reconfiguration" skill now be required for Marauders. If so, what level? And, if we c...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 03:57:00
|
13. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Ravasta Helugo wrote: Battle Cube wrote: Ravasta Helugo wrote: Battle Cube wrote: ... its not good in L4s... Wat its not higher damage, so it doesnt do L4s faster then current ships, so it has higher tank....which is unnecessary, ...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 03:54:00
|
14. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Arthur Aihaken wrote: Forget my other ideas - I just had a wild and crazy one... bas-+tion GÇó a well-fortified position GÇó a projecting part of a fortification GÇó a stronghold into which people could go for shelter during a battle Sugges...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 03:46:00
|
15. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Arthur Aihaken wrote: Tzel Mayon wrote: This is why I believe CCP is essentially putting two ships into one. I can't see how to effectively fit for "both" ship modes at once. So why not just create a Command Battleship that has these awesome...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 03:30:00
|
16. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Arthur Aihaken wrote: I've been mulling this around more. I can't see players running both a Bastion and salvage fit - but even so there should be a bit of a tradeoff. I think the class would be better served by instead allocating the extra hig...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 03:20:00
|
17. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
To answer the questions why I believe Marauders, (and what CCP has already stated), should be optimized for Hit and Run Raider/Marauder tactics: In short, create frigate synergy with Marauders. This accomplishes CCP's goal in nearly every way, AND...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 03:00:00
|
18. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Cade Windstalker wrote: The current elitist view of incursions is entirely the result of the player-base, not CCP. You very much can do incursions in T1 battleships with reasonable efficacy. That most of the major groups don't accept them with...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 02:23:00
|
19. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Theodoric Darkwind wrote: [quote=CCP Ytterbium] Highsec missions are the ONLY thing I see this module being useful for. The inability to receive remote reps = not usable in incursions. . I think the local rep boost, the massive bonuses to r...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 02:16:00
|
20. Sticky:[Winter] Marauder rebalancing - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Incursion Impact: In most incursion fleets, there is a significant need for sniper boats. All of the current sniper battleships will be set aside for these new Siege Battleships, and the SP training time will be very difficult. Instead of g...
- by Tzel Mayon - at 2013.08.30 01:21:00
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |