Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 |
1. Testing for Multifitting/Bulkfitting - in Test Server Feedback [original thread]
And they told us we'd never get any more updates or love for Faction Warfare! HA! Srsly, we need to find a home system to invade just to see how much better this system would feel...
- by Veskrashen - at 2016.06.08 21:55:31
|
2. GalMil: RDRAW wardeced - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Holly Amatin wrote: You declare war on RDRAW and then complain that they help blow up one of your citadels. Bitter much? Nope. Just pointing out continued bad behavior, which pretty much aligns with what we expected from them as "militia pa...
- by Veskrashen - at 2016.06.06 16:24:22
|
3. GalMil: RDRAW wardeced - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
eddie valvetino wrote: For the record Loved this post and your arguement is awesome also for the record I never used the term "eve on easy mode" I will also concede that you guys do need to have a much wilder range of doctrines. It's fair ...
- by Veskrashen - at 2016.05.13 14:32:43
|
4. GalMil: RDRAW wardeced - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
eddie valvetino wrote: The fact is... and this is what makes us "better" is choice.. we can choose who we fly with, kick those that don't fly the right fits and sadly, I speak with a great deal of expirence of FW and FCing FW fleets, FW has non...
- by Veskrashen - at 2016.05.13 13:41:12
|
5. GalMil: RDRAW wardeced - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
eddie valvetino wrote: The fact is... and this is what makes us "better" is choice.. we can choose who we fly with, kick those that don't fly the right fits and sadly, I speak with a great deal of expirence of FW and FCing FW fleets, FW has non...
- by Veskrashen - at 2016.05.13 13:22:16
|
6. GalMil: RDRAW wardeced - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
eddie valvetino wrote: Crosi Wesdo wrote: Thats odd, i pity most snuff pilots who choose to play eve in easy mode. Funny how we play for our own reasons but never miss an opportunity to criticize others for theirs. you sure you're not mi...
- by Veskrashen - at 2016.05.12 11:36:40
|
7. GalMil: RDRAW wardeced - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Dread Operative wrote: Like has been said a couple times just step away from the BS premises and just admit you dislike Tek, SNUFF and an excuse to fight is just that, an excuse. More accurate that the arrangement between SNUFF and Tek has b...
- by Veskrashen - at 2016.05.11 18:08:54
|
8. GalMil: RDRAW wardeced - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Dread Operative wrote: 2) Certain elements of GalMil leadership are historically super salty and toxic, would you want to work with them given the choice? Yup, there's some salty difficult mofos to work with. It's part of why BLFOX isn't in ...
- by Veskrashen - at 2016.05.11 16:11:11
|
9. GalMil: RDRAW wardeced - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Dreaded Vengance wrote: I believe the beef really comes from the fact that RDRAW have chosen to work with another entity; that says to Northen Galmil that in their eye's we're not able to provide that higher tier action desired by RDRAW, in tur...
- by Veskrashen - at 2016.05.11 14:26:54
|
10. GalMil: RDRAW wardeced - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
One point that tends to get missed in the rabblerabble of who awoxed which alt when, is that RDRAW essentially was able to reap the rewards of being supported by mainline GalMil corps in their FW objectives - while teaming up with our main opponen...
- by Veskrashen - at 2016.05.10 20:21:38
|
11. GalMil: RDRAW wardeced - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
IbanezLaney wrote: You guys are doing the right thing - RDRAW have no respect for you. Their corp grew up in an already winning side that you all created and they sit back taking the credit acting as if they played a part in Galmils success. ...
- by Veskrashen - at 2016.05.09 01:47:30
|
12. Factional Warfare revamp. - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
1. This is pretty much the CCP Plan - all out 4 way war. Not sure how it's going to be implemented, but we can reasonably expect to see some focus in early-mid 2016 (gotta get Citadels out and stable first). 2. One of the ways CCP has talked abou...
- by Veskrashen - at 2015.12.09 17:11:03
|
13. What happened to the Galmil circlejerk threads? - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Ray P wrote: so 227 active pilots vs 319? More like 249 vs 422 vs 332. http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=45320,45320,45320,45320&b=6780720,6780960,6783840,6785280&e=239,2879,1439,90&t=bPwcQkwevwbaHaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaq&r=1 ...
- by Veskrashen - at 2015.11.27 16:49:04
|
14. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Anchoring Discussion - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Oreb Wing wrote: If there is no station in system, the assets should be forfeit. Shouldn't be more harsh than nullsec IMO. There's no compelling reason for it. And I think that a lot of folks miss that if you lose a Citadel in a system you'r...
- by Veskrashen - at 2015.11.15 15:46:25
|
15. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Bonuses - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Nikolai Agnon wrote: Fuel costs have been mentioned a few times. +1 to those. In sov null, sov owners have 15 minute structure repair timers, whereas deploying in hostile space is a full 60 minute time. In lowsec and WH space, this is 30 minut...
- by Veskrashen - at 2015.11.15 15:44:20
|
16. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Anchoring Discussion - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Thing is, that if you can anchor in friendly space but not hostile, then the obvious solution is to roll the warzone and only hold the systems long enough to drop some Citadels. That way, even if they get taken back, you can still dock in your own...
- by Veskrashen - at 2015.11.04 17:04:08
|
17. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Bonuses - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Thanatos Marathon wrote: Veskrashen wrote: Dropping 700mil+ Citadels all over the place isn't going to be THAT common Sorry Vesk, gotta disagree on this one. 700 mil for staging with no fuel consumption is cheaper than a large deathstar. ...
- by Veskrashen - at 2015.11.04 16:58:02
|
18. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Bonuses - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Crosi Wesdo wrote: Veskrashen wrote: Tough question. Fuel Bonuses for service modules seems solid. Other than that, possibly allowing them to use service modules typically restricted for SovNull (should any be anticipated) might be an intere...
- by Veskrashen - at 2015.11.04 14:27:36
|
19. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Anchoring Discussion - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
First, I don't think that the "always vulnerable, POS-style RF timer" concept is going to be viable, since CCP has pretty clearly made the decision to use the FozzieSov vulnerability windows on these new structures. Since that's the case, I don't ...
- by Veskrashen - at 2015.11.04 13:54:26
|
20. Faction Warfare and Citadels: Anchoring Discussion - in Warfare & Tactics [original thread]
Actually, the more I think about it the more I like the idea of NPC patrols attacking non-friendly citadels. They're not a huge threat - I'm betting that most NPC patrols don't do thousands of DPS - so clearing them off a Citadel wouldn't be hard...
- by Veskrashen - at 2015.11.04 02:20:06
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |