EVE Search - Whats more fail? Black Ops or T3?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Whats more fail? Black Ops or T3?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Trader Jjenna	Posted - 2009.05.21 06:06:00 - [1] Edited by: Trader Jjenna on 21/05/2009 06:10:37 Black Ops - still generally overpriced with little to justify the additional cost. T3 - does not make any sense. They were supposed to be about the same price as a command ship but the added sting of losing one would come from skill loss. Heak even retraining a rank 1 skill at level IV probably takes 3-4 days depending on attributes. Forget level V. Yet the prices are totally whack. Two major content injections not being adequately used. You decide which is more fail.
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.05.21 06:07:00 - [2] Marauders are fine. Well, two of them at least, the Golem and Paladin are absurdly effective at missioning, which is what they were meant to do. -----------
Trader Jjenna	Posted - 2009.05.21 06:10:00 - [3] Sorry I meant black ops BS. True Marauders are only half fail!
Arthur Frayn V.O.F.L IRON CORE H E L I C O N	Posted - 2009.05.21 06:11:00 - [4] Marauders might actually be good in blobs where the enemy FC might be too distracted to notice your ship is T2 when calling primaries. -- Eventus stultorum magister.
JordanParey Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.05.21 06:43:00 - [5] Originally by: Arthur Frayn Marauders might actually be good in blobs where the enemy FC might be too distracted to notice your ship is T2 when calling primaries. That would be a huge fleet O_o surely someone would notice that you're flying a t2 BS as soon as they target you? Didn't black ops get a boost in the form of being able to covert cyno into cynojammed systems? Sure, they're still way overpriced and not very useful, but that alone could be...useful.
314159265	Posted - 2009.05.21 06:53:00 - [6] Failed. If they were to be the same price as commandships CPP would have made it easier to build them. And, as they're better then commandships, they should be more expensive. And blackops.. I'm not sure how to use them but I know that there's people that do and I believe them when they're saying black ops's are good. Oh, and why are marauders half broken?
Twin blade Minmatar The Triangle Veneratio Venator Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.21 06:55:00 - [7] Well its not T3 for a start the price are still coming down yes slow but they are coming down if you and others would stop whining and check the price you might see that in a month or two they will be fairly cheap. Black ops are usefull abit overpriced but there not that bad but not a fail more a lack of insight when they was made. Death is great rember where all dying to get there.
Warrio GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.21 06:55:00 - [8] Black Ops. The BOps are currently (though not as much as before) terrible for the reasons that have been mentioned time and time again. T3 while I agree that it's really really bad is at least doing what it's meant to be doing and the cost is fine. CCP has allowed plenty of avenues for making ISK, there's no excuse for being broke. sXe
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2009.05.21 07:48:00 - [9] Except a Dev stated that they want them at 300m isk or so. They are not now and they will never get there at current drop rates. Therefore, fail.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.05.21 07:53:00 - [10] Quote: Heak even retraining a rank 1 skill at level IV probably takes 3-4 days depending on attributes. Forget level V. You need 3-4 days to train a rank 1 skill from lvl 3 to lvl 4
Vaerah Vahrokha Minmatar Dark-Rising	Posted - 2009.05.21 08:13:00 - [11] Quote: Two major content injections not being adequately used. You decide which is more fail. Factional warfare would be your 3rd of 2 fail content injections. They seem more bent at crunching new content regardless if it works or not than fixing what's already in place.
Rajere No Trademark	Posted - 2009.05.21 14:47:00 - [12] T3 are pretty much fail, even if they change the drop rate to bring the hulls down to 200-300mil, the reverse engineering mechanics for subsystems ensures they will remain 1.5-2bil for the ships (that is, hull + the non-fail subsystems) Black Ops effectiveness vs price is balanced at about 600-650mil for the hull. They were 500mil before CCP nerfed the ghost ferrogel, and T2 BS prices are hardest hit by the increase in T2 production costs. The opinions expressed in my posts do represent my corp -------------------------- NOTR
adriaans Amarr Ankaa.	Posted - 2009.05.21 15:01:00 - [13] Originally by: Rajere T3 are pretty much fail, even if they change the drop rate to bring the hulls down to 200-300mil, the reverse engineering mechanics for subsystems ensures they will remain 1.5-2bil for the ships (that is, hull + the non-fail subsystems) Black Ops effectiveness vs price is balanced at about 600-650mil for the hull. They were 500mil before CCP nerfed the ghost ferrogel, and T2 BS prices are hardest hit by the increase in T2 production costs. creation of t3 and wormholes and such is probably the only aspect of eve i know too little about, could anyone explain why even if drop rates were increased they would stay that expensive due to the reverse engineering mechanics? (I have no clue about the entire production aspect of it, i know everything about t1 and t2 though if that matters for explaining it to me) and i personally think t3 rocks, only should cost less, and that black ops are not cost effective. -sig- Support the introduction of Blaze crystals for Amarr! Originally by: UMEE if ure another fotm re-roller, then dont pvp. you'll fail. QFT!
Evee Amine Shadow Company	Posted - 2009.05.21 15:25:00 - [14] Originally by: adriaans Originally by: Rajere T3 are pretty much fail, even if they change the drop rate to bring the hulls down to 200-300mil, the reverse engineering mechanics for subsystems ensures they will remain 1.5-2bil for the ships (that is, hull + the non-fail subsystems) Black Ops effectiveness vs price is balanced at about 600-650mil for the hull. They were 500mil before CCP nerfed the ghost ferrogel, and T2 BS prices are hardest hit by the increase in T2 production costs. creation of t3 and wormholes and such is probably the only aspect of eve i know too little about, could anyone explain why even if drop rates were increased they would stay that expensive due to the reverse engineering mechanics? (I have no clue about the entire production aspect of it, i know everything about t1 and t2 though if that matters for explaining it to me) and i personally think t3 rocks, only should cost less, and that black ops are not cost effective. The problem with assuming increasing drop rates will decrease price is that you're assuming a drop increase will increase supply, which in this case isn't true. due to pain in the assness of running sleepers people expect to make loads of ISK. If you increase drop rates, the amount of ISK you can make in w-space will decrease due to increased supply of sleeper loot, and people will leave w-space as its no longer worth their time. people will keep leaving, and thus decreasing supply and increasing price, until you have pretty much the same volume on the market as we do now, selling for the same prices. Changing drop rates can't dictate how much sleeper loot is on the market since people can just not fight sleepers. The only thing it will change is how many people can be actively running wormholes and making a good amount of isk off it. Of course this is assuming the people running wormholes have a clue, and seeing how freaking hard the higher level wormholes where drops are actually worth it are, I think its a safe assumption to make.
Scientific Method	Posted - 2009.05.21 17:16:00 - [15] Originally by: Evee Amine The problem with assuming increasing drop rates will decrease price is that you're assuming a drop increase will increase supply, which in this case isn't true. If they drop twice as much, supply will increase if people hunt as much, and there will be twice as many items on the market. Assuming this causes the price per item to halve, ISK per run stays the same, and the price drops. The assumption of price halving depends on how people react to the increased supply and reduced price, and frankly, can't credibly be called at this point. Quote: due to pain in the assness of running sleepers people expect to make loads of ISK. If you increase drop rates, the amount of ISK you can make in w-space will decrease due to increased supply of sleeper loot Dependent on the price elasticity of sleeper loot, which is unknown. Assuming the increased drop rate doesn't bring in more sleeper hunters, the same people have all the sleeper loot, they just have twice as much as before, and the same control over price as they currently do. I'm mystified as to why you make the assumption that increasing supply will cause a price crash, rather than a proportionate decrease.
Mystafyre Caldari Dark Materials Heretic Nation	Posted - 2009.05.21 17:21:00 - [16] So, if you can't afford it, it's fail?
Anubis Xian Reavers	Posted - 2009.05.21 17:43:00 - [17] T3 ships do what they do better than any other ship in the game. Mainly because they have zero competition. Precisely none. They fit the Fun and Versatile Niche. Black Ops do nothing that warrants the cost and the drawbacks, great concept just like Titans were...horribly implemented just like Titans are. So I'd call them the bigger failure. Originally by: CCP Oveur The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
Zaerlorth Maelkor The Maverick Navy Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.21 18:03:00 - [18] Originally by: Trader Jjenna Heak even retraining a rank 1 skill at level IV probably takes 3-4 days depending on attributes. Forget level V. What are your attributes at, exactly? 4 willpower, 4 perception, 4 intelligence, 4 memory and 12 charisma with no learning skills trained? ================================================== I should really get a sig.
Mr Reeth	Posted - 2009.05.21 18:26:00 - [19] I've been pretty disappointed by a lot of things CCP have implemented recently(relative term). heat LvL 5 missions Black Ops Tech 3 Factional Warfare Abaddon
Potrero Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.05.21 19:17:00 - [20] Originally by: Trader Jjenna Whats more fail? Black Ops or T3? Black Ops. Black Ops was introduced a year ago and is still unusable. T3 have at least another year to go before they're even in the same league.
Woulvesbaine	Posted - 2009.05.21 20:37:00 - [21] Originally by: Zaerlorth Maelkor Originally by: Trader Jjenna Heak even retraining a rank 1 skill at level IV probably takes 3-4 days depending on attributes. Forget level V. What are your attributes at, exactly? 4 willpower, 4 perception, 4 intelligence, 4 memory and 12 charisma with no learning skills trained? Funny - at between 14 and 25 with my PvP pod for all characterisitics, training a defense subsystem from level 3 to level 4 takes 6 days. My hihgher characteristics are now percep/will but all my traning is skilled up etc. I think the original poster got it right . . . maybe even generous. At least according to evemon. Maybe a problem with evemon? Someone else check this.
Rajere No Trademark	Posted - 2009.05.21 21:01:00 - [22] Edited by: Rajere on 21/05/2009 21:02:26 Quote: Funny - at between 14 and 25 with my PvP pod for all characterisitics, training a defense subsystem from level 3 to level 4 takes 6 days. My hihgher characteristics are now percep/will but all my traning is skilled up etc. about to finish training the first one now, but it's 3 days 9 hours for me to train any subsystem skill from 4 to 5. Originally by: adriaans creation of t3 and wormholes and such is probably the only aspect of eve i know too little about, could anyone explain why even if drop rates were increased they would stay that expensive due to the reverse engineering mechanics? (I have no clue about the entire production aspect of it, i know everything about t1 and t2 though if that matters for explaining it to me) T3 cruiser production requires a specific salvage that's an uncommon drop. It drops in WHs as low as C2's, which can be easily solo'd, the problem is the rarity combined with it's used for everything T3. Sub System reverse engineering works the same way T2 ship invention worked originally. ie you gather components for the attempt and if successful, your bpc is for a random type. For T2 ships, this meant if you were trying to invent a caldari recon, you could get a falcon or a rook bpc. For T3, you try and reverse engineer a Gallente offensive subsystem, and if successful you get Covert Reconfig, Dissonic Encoding, Drone Synthesis, or Hybrid Propulsion. The problem with this is the same as invention used to be. Nobody wanted Rook BPCs, everyone wanted Falcons. The majority of T3 Subsystems are terrible, there's only 1 sometimes 2 good subsystems per category, and the rest are fail. CCP tried to dissuade this by varying the slot layouts on the subsystems, but to maintain overall balance they could only vary slots so much, otherwise people would choose subsystems based solely on slots rather than the bonuses. As far as black ops being fail is concerned, it would be awesome if all you nubs would encourage CCP to reduce the production costs on Black Ops, so that their price drops to what you think they're worth. There market cost is basically their build cost, because there isn't any demand, and their current build costs is what makes them 700-800mil each. tia The opinions expressed in my posts do represent my corp -------------------------- NOTR
Yakov Draken Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.05.21 21:01:00 - [23] I don't agree that T3 ships = fail. The actual ships are seriously awesome and while the price now is insane this may well change. CCP have said they want them to come down in price and if necessary will tweak things to bring this about. Lets wait and see how much T3 ships come down in price.
Yakov Draken Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.05.21 21:03:00 - [24] Originally by: Rajere For T3, you try and reverse engineer a Gallente offensive subsystem, and if successful you get Covert Reconfig, Dissonic Encoding, Drone Synthesis, or Hybrid Propulsion. The problem with this is the same as invention used to be. Nobody wanted Rook BPCs, everyone wanted Falcons. The majority of T3 Subsystems are terrible, Thanks for explaining this. Lets hope CCP changes this.
adriaans Amarr Ankaa.	Posted - 2009.05.21 21:10:00 - [25] Originally by: Rajere For T3, you try and reverse engineer a Gallente offensive subsystem, and if successful you get Covert Reconfig, Dissonic Encoding, Drone Synthesis, or Hybrid Propulsion. The problem with this is the same as invention used to be. Nobody wanted Rook BPCs, everyone wanted Falcons. The majority of T3 Subsystems are terrible, thanks for that explanation, it makes a lot more sense now :) and yes, ccp reduce black op build costs with 50% already! -sig- Support the introduction of Blaze crystals for Amarr! Originally by: UMEE if ure another fotm re-roller, then dont pvp. you'll fail. QFT!
Guillame Herschel Gallente Buffalo Soldiers	Posted - 2009.05.21 21:43:00 - [26] Originally by: Mr Reeth I've been pretty disappointed by a lot of things CCP have implemented recently(relative term). heat Heat is major win, one of the few things they've added recently that enhances the game, with no drawback. Boosters are another win. *-- The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then* --**
Guillame Herschel Gallente Buffalo Soldiers	Posted - 2009.05.21 21:46:00 - [27] Originally by: Rajere CCP tried to dissuade this by varying the slot layouts on the subsystems, but to maintain overall balance they could only vary slots so much, otherwise people would choose subsystems based solely on slots rather than the bonuses. And what's wrong with that? T3 is supposed to be versatile. If I want to maximize slots while ignoring bonuses, why can't they balance that? What am I really going to do with 8 unbonused high and 8 unbonused lows, that is more overpowered than 6 bonused highs and 6 bonused lows? *-- The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then* --**
Rajere No Trademark	Posted - 2009.05.21 22:10:00 - [28] Edited by: Rajere on 21/05/2009 22:13:21 The problem is you have to start with a baseline, which they did by controlling weapon hardpoints, which is controlled by your offensive subsystem (Engineering can add another, but ignoring that for now). So potential high slots (thus potential DPS) needed is controlled by the subsystem that gives you a bonus to your high slots. For all the other subsystems, for someone to choose one of the crappy subsystems instead of the good one, you'd need to offer extra slots, for it to overcome the one good subsystem bonus in that category. Which at that point it's not a question of unbonused highs vs bonused high's, it's 5 or 6 bonused highslots for weapons, and then 8 mids/4-6 lows or 8 lows/4-6 mids, etc. vs 5 or 6 bonused high slots, then a sub-optimal slot layout for your mids/lows like 3 mids, 6 lows, etc. The opinions expressed in my posts do represent my corp -------------------------- NOTR
Lilith Velkor Minmatar OVERLOAD. Dead Terrorists	Posted - 2009.05.21 22:17:00 - [29] Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 21/05/2009 22:17:27 Originally by: Woulvesbaine Funny - at between 14 and 25 with my PvP pod for all characterisitics, training a defense subsystem from level 3 to level 4 takes 6 days. My hihgher characteristics are now percep/will but all my traning is skilled up etc. You better petition that asap At my attributes, which are far from optimized and without learning implants it takes me a bit more than a day to get the subsystem skills from 3 to 4. (checked ingame, I happen to have it trained to lvl3 across the board in case I find an unmanned t3 ship by chance :P)
SpaceMagic Amarr Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers	Posted - 2009.05.21 22:23:00 - [30] t3 Ships Are awsome and allow for customization unlike any other ship, the prices are fine you'll never see them as cheap as a command ship,
Sumelar	Posted - 2009.05.21 23:37:00 - [31] The price on T3 will stabilize, this isn't WoW where you get everything handed to you instantly.
Labratory Rat	Posted - 2009.05.22 01:22:00 - [32] Its too early to decide what enhancement was the worst investment by CCP. My crystal ball tells me that the released version of WH+T3 will reign supreme as the worst expansion ever due to its terrible economics, low spawn rates, horrific manufacturing randomness and how a WH system gets crippled if someone wants to settle in it. Of course, all the components are there for a great product if it gets a significant rethinking on how it should work. The real question is can CCP think itself out of the corner it painted itself into? Does anyone have a clue?!?!?!?!?!
Labratory Rat	Posted - 2009.05.22 01:26:00 - [33] Originally by: Sumelar The price on T3 will stabilize, this isn't WoW where you get everything handed to you instantly. I am sure we all appreciate your baseless prognostication and insinuation. Pray tell at what level will T3 prices stabilize and when? Did an actual neuron fire off when you wrote that or was it a Pavlovian response?
Fidus Leguleius	Posted - 2009.05.22 01:30:00 - [34] Very true. What players don't seem to realize is that for most parts the prices are controlled by the collective minds of the big alliances, not CCP. If it doesn't serve their purposes, the prices stay high. Sadly solo pvp is a thing of the past, but if CCP boosts one ship type too much, there will be much more complaints about the leverage it gives to the masses. I have faith in the t3 ships though. Along with implants and boosters it will make a difference, especially with the interdiction immunity. If someone has any experience with using the strategic cruisers, then please share with us your death and glory. Fidus
Fidus Leguleius	Posted - 2009.05.22 02:02:00 - [35] I was actually replying to Sumelar, who I agree with. This game is built to challenge the player, not to satisfy the Pavlovian hunger for instant satisfaction.
Rajere No Trademark	Posted - 2009.05.22 07:36:00 - [36] Originally by: SpaceMagic t3 Ships Are awsome and allow for customization unlike any other ship, the prices are fine you'll never see them as cheap as a command ship, Customization is largely overrated. Do you have any idea how many millions of module configurations you could fit onto, lets say, a Drake? Not even including rigs, just the the modules. Do you have any idea what percentage of these potential fits are slightly above complete fail comedy killmails? Yeah, like 3. My bad, that's not 3%, that's 3 total setups. There is only 1, sometimes 2 decent sub-systems per category. There is also only 1, sometimes 2 differences in slot additions per category. The only subsystem with a bonus which costs you a module slot is the bubble immunity, and that's well worth it in 0.0, and a non-issue in low sec. Otherwise, the total number of slots and variations in high/med/low is extremely minor across all variations of a T3 cruisers, even including the horrible configurations of entirely fail subsystem choices. There's maybe 4-5 viable setups for each T3 line, and honestly that's being generous and including the active tank ones when I really shouldn't. All Customization does is allow you to gimp your 1.5-2bil isk cruiser into uselessness. The opinions expressed in my posts do represent my corp -------------------------- NOTR
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2009.05.22 08:04:00 - [37] Originally by: 314159265 . Oh, and why are marauders half broken? I suspect it's because half the guns are broken, or at least less good for the job at hand. I can't really speak from experience as the only time I ever recall using blasters is when I was tackling for a corp mate out in low sec in a Hookbill and I've only once taken to space in a minmatar ship of any sort.
Misanth The Glenn Quagmire Finishing School for Young Ladies Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.22 08:54:00 - [38] Neither is fail. Prices can be discussed, so can fuel bays etc, but both BO and T3 are viable shiptypes. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen.
Rajere No Trademark	Posted - 2009.05.22 10:30:00 - [39] Originally by: Misanth Neither is fail. Prices can be discussed, so can fuel bays etc, but both BO and T3 are viable shiptypes. shhh. let them bug CCP until they cut the production costs of Black Ops in half. The opinions expressed in my posts do represent my corp -------------------------- NOTR
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.05.22 10:48:00 - [40] Third option; you fail! T3 are controlled by supply and demand. If players can't be arsed to go into wormholes to get the needed supplies, prices go up. Are you with me? Minerals too, are controlled by supply and demand. If players can't be arsed to mine to get the needed supplies, prices go up. Are you with me? Loyalty points and faction rewards too, are controlled by supply and demand. If players can't be arsed to mission to get the needed supplies, prices go up. Are you with me? Basic economy 101; you with me?
Qual Gallente Cornexant Research	Posted - 2009.05.22 10:59:00 - [41] This makes me think of the first year of the Interceptors (the first T2 ship) when people said it was insane to pay 6M for a frigate and they simply where not worth the cost when you could get the best cruiser at the same price. I lol when I read threds like this now.. "The short version: Qual is right." -Papa Smurf
Tippia Raddick Explorations Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.05.22 11:02:00 - [42] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Basic economy 101; you with me? No, you'll have to take that class alone. In particular, take note of the concept of "opportunity cost". ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Tagami Wasp	Posted - 2009.05.23 06:00:00 - [43] BO are godly good now. Look around, you'll find people asking: "Where did that come from?" while getting podded. The price tag should go down, I want one too. T3 price needs to go down too, I want one too. :P
Lewyrus Jugis Modo Utopia Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.05.23 09:45:00 - [44] Edited by: Lewyrus on 23/05/2009 09:45:27
MukkBarovian	Posted - 2009.05.23 11:26:00 - [45] T3 ships lose comepletely. For the most part I think people can agree niether ship should be used in PvP when people care aout cost-effectiveness. But if you don't try to take black ops into combat they have a use. Mobile cloaky jump gate with restricted access. For full effect you need a t2 cloaky hauler for the fuel. So you're paying 800 mil for your mobile cloaky jump gate and you need two alts with relatively high skillpoints. But your investment is in comparatively little danger.
Demoria The Priory	Posted - 2009.05.23 13:59:00 - [46] Saying that black ops are bad just shows how useless people really are in this game. Seriously, well organized use of black ops ships can be lethal in many situations. All you gotta do is to choose situations you use them in. Dropping like five gank fitted redeemers on a mid size gang that isn't prepared for them is pure epicness. Nuff' said.
gwnorth Caldari Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2009.05.23 14:28:00 - [47] T3 ships are definitely win. The interdiction subsystem that allows you warp through bubbles and hic points is worth the isk. because you can't afford it doesn't mean it's fail.
foobarx	Posted - 2009.05.23 14:51:00 - [48] Originally by: Derek Sigres Originally by: 314159265 . Oh, and why are marauders half broken? I suspect it's because half the guns are broken, or at least less good for the job at hand. I can't really speak from experience as the only time I ever recall using blasters is when I was tackling for a corp mate out in low sec in a Hookbill and I've only once taken to space in a minmatar ship of any sort. Marauders aren't broken at all. They're awesome at the job they were designed to do - running missions. ISK/hr rate in a Marauder is double that of a normal BS. They are crippled for PvP, but that was deliberate.
Shadowsword Epsilon Lyr Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.05.23 14:57:00 - [49] Originally by: gwnorth T3 ships are definitely win. The interdiction subsystem that allows you warp through bubbles and hic points is worth the isk. because you can't afford it doesn't mean it's fail. So you're either claiming that every T3 cruiser should be fitted with it (nice for diversity and polyvalence. What was the point of modular design again?), or that one single subsytem is so overpowered it justify a cost of billions (and thus is in big need of a nerf). Which one is it? ------------------------------------------
Rajere No Trademark	Posted - 2009.05.23 15:56:00 - [50] Originally by: Demoria Saying that black ops are bad just shows how useless people really are in this game. Seriously, well organized use of black ops ships can be lethal in many situations. All you gotta do is to choose situations you use them in. Dropping like five gank fitted redeemers on a mid size gang that isn't prepared for them is pure epicness. Nuff' said. Honestly dude I wouldn't bother, not only are the majority of the players in this game idiots, they're also perfectly content with their ignorance. Those who frequent the forums even go out of their way to remain ignorant in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Nothing you can say will enlighten them, besides in a week they will have forgotten everything you said anyway. We've been hot dropping people with Black Ops since March, 2008. (It took a while train them up, and we were initially busy playing with HICs for the first few months) Back when I was naive enough to believe that ignorance could be cured with informative forum posts, I wrote a detailed step by step description of the strategies and tactics for successful Black Ops usage, including limitations on use, when to use them, when not, etc so forth. This was back in July 2008. Do you know who the first poster was to respond to my step by step guide to using blackops? Waxau. 1 week later, guess who forgot I had posted said guide, or that he had read and replied to it? Yep, Waxau. The same Waxau who spent the next year posting in every BOs thread I posted in giving me sh*t for being secretive and not sharing my leet strats with him so that he could learn how to not fail with his Black Ops ship. Nobody knows how to use search (or eve-search.com), everyone has ADHD. A week from now there will be another thread pop up just like this one, and nobody will remember anything that was posted in this one. Eventually you realize that the only useful thing you can do with the forums is troll people. The only forum battle worth fighting is ensuring that CCP doesn't listen to the idiots, and even those are lost causes most of the time. The opinions expressed in my posts do represent my corp -------------------------- NOTR
Misanth The Glenn Quagmire Finishing School for Young Ladies Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.23 18:26:00 - [51] Originally by: Rajere Honestly dude I wouldn't bother, not only are the majority of the players in this game idiots, they're also perfectly content with their ignorance. That. Another description would be to simply call them sheeps. Dogs bark left, sheep go left. Dogs run around sheep and they will run forward. Dogs bark right, sheeps turn right. Sheep gets trapped in, dog gets pat on head and a bone. Woof woof. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen.
gwnorth Caldari Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2009.05.24 05:04:00 - [52] Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: gwnorth T3 ships are definitely win. The interdiction subsystem that allows you warp through bubbles and hic points is worth the isk. because you can't afford it doesn't mean it's fail. So you're either claiming that every T3 cruiser should be fitted with it (nice for diversity and polyvalence. What was the point of modular design again?), or that one single subsytem is so overpowered it justify a cost of billions (and thus is in big need of a nerf). Which one is it? Your question is fail.
Rivur'Tam the united	Posted - 2009.05.24 11:42:00 - [53] whine whine whine the ship prices are fine for what they do the only ship that is overpriced compared to its abilites is a mothership and i own sin/kronos/proteus and a mothership and i feel they are all priced fine apart from motherships as the ships have a role, ur just *****ing because u can't afford them. my vid watch now resized my sig is this corre
Sumelar	Posted - 2009.05.24 15:49:00 - [54] Edited by: Sumelar on 24/05/2009 15:53:06 Originally by: Labratory Rat Originally by: Sumelar The price on T3 will stabilize, this isn't WoW where you get everything handed to you instantly. I am sure we all appreciate your baseless prognostication and insinuation. Pray tell at what level will T3 prices stabilize and when? Did an actual neuron fire off when you wrote that or was it a Pavlovian response? I'll tell you when you tell me how you know they're going to stay insanely overpriced forever. Don't try to insult me just because you can't fly the new ships the week they come out, for dirt cheap. You must be new to this game if you think anything happens that quickly. Furthermore, start digging through the past threads, and you'll find the exact same nonsense about tech 2 when it first came out. Obviously no one is saying that isn't worth the price anymore, and tech 3 will be the same way.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.