Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
SuiJuris
Absinthe Brothers Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 21:48:00 -
[151]
Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 16/09/2009 15:15:47
Originally by: SuiJuris All you people complaining that these things will be unkillible, 1v1 yes they will be VERY VERY hard to kill but thats the point of them.
Wait, so it's fine if a ship is designed to be OP solo and the best way to kill it is to bring one of your own (or gang up on it). Interesting
The justification it's fine was used once before, though.
Did I say you would need other AF's to counter them cause you wont. Even with these changes 2 cruisers will murder 2 AF's. Because neither of the AF's will be able to maintain transversal on both cruisers. 1700 ms ISN't THAT fast to be zipping around the battlefield. There is a reason AB intie's stay at home for fleet work.
You guys are all crying that these will be the new Iwin buttons but A EQUAL NUMBER of other anything cruiser and up will murder them in any engagement outside of a 1v1. --- I am taking pre orders for Navy Armageddons |
Attamir Muzatta
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 21:51:00 -
[152]
"Reduce MWD sig radius bonus by 5% per level" bonus?
|
Cpt Branko
Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 21:55:00 -
[153]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 16/09/2009 21:56:08
Originally by: Attamir Muzatta "Reduce MWD sig radius bonus by 5% per level" bonus?
MWD sig bloom reduction made interceptors nowdays much better then non-pimped interceptors in the nano age, and inferior to pimped interceptors of the nano age (by pimped I mean 10km/s minimum), tracking wise. Old interceptors were riskier to fly if you decided not to spend ISK on them.
It's feasible for AFs, though... since MWD can be deactivated + takes more cap + takes more fittings and they are not as fast with a MWD on as interceptors are.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Atiana Obaani
Tomoe Laboratories Celestial Imperative
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 22:05:00 -
[154]
I still don't understand why my idea of limited racial/nonracial ewar immunity got ****canned. Ten times better than an afterburner bonus and actually gives them a role.
|
BABARR
PARABELUM-Project
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 22:50:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Opertone Edited by: Opertone on 16/09/2009 20:18:48
Originally by: BABARR Edited by: BABARR on 16/09/2009 15:05:31 gratz CCP to make another ship "uncatchable" What does it take to kill an AF after that? -> blob. A hac whith 2xWeb going to have to fear an AS now...
Rapier with autocannons can deal some damage and stay at 35 KM range with MWD, where tracking is irrelevant. Any recon can beat an AF, or at least not fall to it
added: Destroyer and even two destroyers can take care of an AF, it is fairly easy to track everything in a range dictating turret boat.
Track yes, but keep at range for tackle, no, PVP in eve is not like the eve tournament, you have to TACKLE for kill. And a rapier won't be able to tackle fast on a gate and kill the AF before it jump back. And if you are able to deal damage (decent damage, enought to kill an AF) whith autocanon at more than 15km, i want your fit :)
Of course you can even kill an AF, but 15% bonus per level it's simply too much. Just 5% or 7,5% will be already awesome. Dev make a patch to reduce the speed of all ship, and now they nerf the web and boost the AF speed, Big fat ass ship are already very easy to catch and often die, but now, they won't be able to kill anything.
...
"Si vis pacem, parabellum" |
Freelancer117
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 23:17:00 -
[156]
Hi, since I went online with Eve it has been t1 ships for the last 7 months, if you make an AF that fast with afterburners and it keeps it small signature size accordingly, I would want too try them out asap.
The thing that held me back so far was the cost of an AF, and the fear too loose it. One honest carebear opinion is all I can give atm, sorry.
Greetz, Freelancer117
|
Kai Lae
Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 23:32:00 -
[157]
Hmm, 6 pages of comment when no one has even been able to try the concept on the test server :)
Lot of inty people here or people who have never really used an assault frigate.
I reserve most comment until I get to try it out. However, the boost proposed does nothing to address failures with specific hull classes (kestrel out DPS hawk, retribution only 1 midslot, etc). These still require addressing.
|
McCreary075
Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 23:53:00 -
[158]
Originally by: Atiana Obaani I still don't understand why my idea of limited racial/nonracial ewar immunity got ****canned. Ten times better than an afterburner bonus and actually gives them a role.
What role is that? Oh, I'm immune to, lets say, tracking disruptors, what role does that fill? Insert damps, ECM, or painting, and all it does is make the AF stronger by eliminating one particular counter, of which there are many. I fail to see what 'role' they fill with an EWAR resistance bonus.
I have been telling corpmates for months that a 5-10% boost to AB speed would make AFs an excellent choice for heavy tackle. Right now, they take too long to get into range AB fit, and so unless the target is already webbed, you probably aren't going to keep up. If you MWD fit it, you lose the best part of the AF's defense, the sig radius. Also, it really hurts to fit MWD's on AF's, moreso than other ships, at least, it seems to me.
Having said that, I really think part of the problem lies in the AB realm. They don't boost speed enough, and they hurt your align just as bad as an MWD does. If AF's could get a bonus to the agility penalty with an AB, that could be intriguing, and I'll admit to not having completely thought that last bit out.
Balance between the AFs could also use some love, one and two slot AF's are definitely at a disadvantage in the heavy tackle role. So if you want AF's to fulfill that role exclusively, you'd need to change the slot layouts of some AF's. Alternatively, you could assign racial bonuses to be similar to BC/HAC styles. Gallente AF's could get rep amount bonus, for example. But this just turns them into mini-hacs, which, I suppose could be done, it just doesn't seem as attractive as something else.
|
Kethry Avenger
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 23:57:00 -
[159]
As long as the Retribution gets a extra midslot, and the missile and rocket using AF's get bonuses that make missiles and rockets fired from one AF able to contend with another ship of there class then good.
This could make AF's a great alternate choice compared to Ceptors.
And while your at it give the Coercer a second midslot too! If for balance you have to give all destroyers a second mid then that's fine.
|
Guillame Herschel
Gallente NME1
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 00:07:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Want to know what counters AF's going 1.5-2k/s with no signature increase? A big fat nothing.
I'm already going that fast in a Gistii A-Type AB Wolf. It should pass 4 km/sec with overloading after the boost.
-- He said "The President is near."
|
|
SuiJuris
Absinthe Brothers Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 00:52:00 -
[161]
Originally by: Guillame Herschel Edited by: Guillame Herschel on 17/09/2009 00:18:23
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Want to know what counters AF's going 1.5-2k/s with no signature increase? A big fat nothing.
I'm already going that fast in a Gistii A-Type AB Wolf. It should pass 3 km/sec with overloading after the boost.
Gistii A-Type 1MN Afterburner post-boost = 278.25 %
Add Zor's Hyperlink and a Rogue MY-2 = 306.075 %
Pretty sick.
those pimp faction AB's might need a look at with this change, but overall its not as op as you guys make it sound. The sky is not falling and 2x AF's will lose to 2x Cruisers nearly everytime. --- I am taking pre orders for Navy Armageddons |
slightly sillydude
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 01:14:00 -
[162]
Edited by: slightly sillydude on 17/09/2009 01:15:01 If this is going to happen, which it probably will, it will be a good opportunity to get CCP to rethink web strength. Maybe not 90 again but 75-80% might be nice. Rapier might be important again.
|
Modrak Vseth
Veto.
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 01:14:00 -
[163]
Part of the problem for me is that all AFs are lumped in together. When people talk about AF "reform", they often times expect the same role bonus to apply to all AFs across the board. That's completely the wrong way to look at it IMO, especially across race but even within a race. All other T2 ship classes that have two ships typically have distinctly different missions which are reflected within their bonuses. It can be seen on Inties, Recons, Command Ships, HACs... why shouldn't the same be true with AFs? The role bonuses for AFs don't define them at all (ok, at least typically) and I think that's where the biggest impact can be.
It would completely make sense to me if one AF was a heavy tackler with an AB boost or web immunity and high DPS (for a frigate) but no bonus to weapon ranges while the other is a lower DPS anti-drone/fighter boat with significant weapon range bonuses and agility bonuses but with lower overall DPS and no AB bonus or web immunity (or at least a smaller bonus).
I don't think these types of bonuses would significantly step on the toes of any other ship class (well, it could be argued the HACs in the heavy tackler role slightly or the Inties in the drone killer role, but I don't think so). It would define the ships within the role as well as allowing for some definition between the races (weapon specific bonuses can still be placed on the racial frigate skill).
|
Soporo
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 01:26:00 -
[164]
Originally by: SuiJuris
Originally by: Guillame Herschel Edited by: Guillame Herschel on 17/09/2009 00:18:23
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Want to know what counters AF's going 1.5-2k/s with no signature increase? A big fat nothing.
I'm already going that fast in a Gistii A-Type AB Wolf. It should pass 3 km/sec with overloading after the boost.
Gistii A-Type 1MN Afterburner post-boost = 278.25 %
Add Zor's Hyperlink and a Rogue MY-2 = 306.075 %
Pretty sick.
those pimp faction AB's might need a look at with this change, but overall its not as op as you guys make it sound. The sky is not falling and 2x AF's will lose to 2x Cruisers nearly everytime.
Not if those Cruisers use light missiles they won't.
|
RedSplat
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 01:43:00 -
[165]
The dual MSE jag, my fav ship of all time, is now AWESOME
Also, try a 3 OD II (oe 2 OD DCU) AB II or C type AB fit with snakes and boosters.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
|
Daniel Borealis
Minmatar Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 03:03:00 -
[166]
If this change goes through as proposed.. what exactly is the role for close range hac's? They're all ready outperformed by nearly all bc's (considering the cost question). More importantly, light drones are not a counter for assault frigs, as any tanked af can easily tank quite a few light drones...
People saying that an af cannot solo a hac are being extremely foolish.. I know, I've done it, and it's easy. Perhaps some sort of speed boost for afterburner hac's?
Overall I would rather no such ab change to af's was made. They're quite effective as it is. Translation And Grammar Service Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels. Zymurgist |
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 03:18:00 -
[167]
Well, as much as I love my Jaguar, but this is certainly a very bad idea.
Can only suggest to reconsider this, mark my word its gonna end in tears...
|
Updyke
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 05:18:00 -
[168]
Finally, this gives AFs a role:
AF: scram range tackler. Inty: long range tackler.
before this change the best AB frig was the Ranis, with AB ranis lolfits pwning everything including AFs (on sisi at least).
Now when someone wants to fly an AB frig they've got a lot more choices.
What would go well with these changes:
1) slight web strength increase, maybe up to 70 or 75% maximum. 2) same AB boost for all hacs. maybe even a 10% per level AB boost for hacs.
|
Opertone
Caldari Monsters
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 05:29:00 -
[169]
Edited by: Opertone on 17/09/2009 05:35:27 Now we get whiners, who whine that the bigger the better is always the ultimate choice... They are so scared of equal opportunity, they insist that their HACs are to be superior.
In fact AB bonus is needed, since small ships must have clear speed advantage over larger ships. Small ships will be an option for a POD pilot, an option with smaller signature, yet lower DPS 200-300 max. Heavy assault cruisers have 400-900 DPS range and can't complain about the lack of hit points.
added: maybe you need to learn tactics, which will work against AFs. Tie up one of the AFs in scram range fight, let a gang mate fire at the AF from 30 km range - most hits will land, also try sniper destroyer for assist. It has absolutely no issues with tracking, a sniper BC at 50 KM range will have a good chance to nail the AF, something like artillery hurricane.
|
Moopstah
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 06:09:00 -
[170]
While I do agree there are some issues with AF's to be dealt with. I don't think speed is a major issue. Rockets need a total revamping... Combine a terrible explosion velocity, with terrible damage, and terrible range is kinda... Fail. Take the amarr for example. The vengence has a pretty nifty tank, but can't do any damage despite getting a damage bonus. And the retribution, is complete fail with only 1 mid. How can a frigate even remotely tackle properish with one mid? Wtf?
Yeah the amarr need love with their AF's. (In before CCP <3's amarr)
Fix the slot layout problems on your AF's before giving blanket buffs. :)
Just my opinion.
|
|
Theron Gyrow
Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 07:07:00 -
[171]
Originally by: M Blanc (assuming we're not going to be daft and base our 'oh noes, sky si falling!!!111!' arguments around characters with snakesets flying deadspace-fit ships).
Given that CCP balanced damps to "being good with maxed skills in a dual-rigged bonused ship with a max-skilled Eos pilot with mindlink giving bonuses", I don't see why not. -- Gradient forum |
Cpt Branko
Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 07:14:00 -
[172]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 17/09/2009 07:15:57 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 17/09/2009 07:14:31
Originally by: Daniel Borealis If this change goes through as proposed.. what exactly is the role for close range hac's? They're all ready outperformed by nearly all bc's (considering the cost question). More importantly, light drones are not a counter for assault frigs, as any tanked af can easily tank quite a few light drones...
People saying that an af cannot solo a hac are being extremely foolish.. I know, I've done it, and it's easy. Perhaps some sort of speed boost for afterburner hac's?
Overall I would rather no such ab change to af's was made. They're quite effective as it is.
The thing is that most HACs which are considered worthwhile are sniper HACs; they offer things T1 counterparts cannot do, which is why they're considered good value for money. Only the Diemost has nothing that T1 doesn't offer, which is why it's generally considered to be a failboat.
They're far from being the be-all of cruiser-sized combat; but are rather specialized combat ships. Which is good balance.
Originally by: Theron Gyrow
Originally by: M Blanc (assuming we're not going to be daft and base our 'oh noes, sky si falling!!!111!' arguments around characters with snakesets flying deadspace-fit ships).
Given that CCP balanced damps to "being good with maxed skills in a dual-rigged bonused ship with a max-skilled Eos pilot with mindlink giving bonuses", I don't see why not.
Was a good argument too when we were discussing nanos, since 90% of the arguments were revolving on how ludicrous the speed of HG snaked + 1B setups was.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Daniel Borealis
Minmatar Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 07:45:00 -
[173]
Edited by: Daniel Borealis on 17/09/2009 07:46:17 Edited by: Daniel Borealis on 17/09/2009 07:45:45
Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 17/09/2009 07:15:57 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 17/09/2009 07:14:31
Originally by: Daniel Borealis If this change goes through as proposed.. what exactly is the role for close range hac's? They're all ready outperformed by nearly all bc's (considering the cost question). More importantly, light drones are not a counter for assault frigs, as any tanked af can easily tank quite a few light drones...
People saying that an af cannot solo a hac are being extremely foolish.. I know, I've done it, and it's easy. Perhaps some sort of speed boost for afterburner hac's?
Overall I would rather no such ab change to af's was made. They're quite effective as it is.
The thing is that most HACs which are considered worthwhile are sniper HACs; they offer things T1 counterparts cannot do, which is why they're considered good value for money. Only the Diemost has nothing that T1 doesn't offer, which is why it's generally considered to be a failboat.
They're far from being the be-all of cruiser-sized combat; but are rather specialized combat ships. Which is good balance.
Obviously long range sniper HAC's have their niche. However, over time increasing changes have continued to make roaming with very expensive close range HAC's more and more problematic. I'm sure I don't have to list the changes that lead to it... (AB boost, scrams=no mwd, etc)
The thing about this change is that it fixes no discernible problem while making af's borderline overpowered. This is a 20-30 million isk ship with dps approaching a close range HAC's, the ability to shrug off larger fire due to a tiny signature radius and a propulsion mod that neither raises its signature nor can be realistically shut off with a scram or medium neutralizer. A close range HAC such as a vagabond in comparison will cost over 150 million ISK, and barely have the ability to outrun an AB AF, while doing slightly more EFT damage.
I'm not going to go into a detailed discussion of the current shortcomings of close range HAC's, but they exemplify the current trend toward smaller and cheaper ships that can effectively disable a very expensive larger ship. Even light drones are no solution; I know my Jaguar can easily tank 5x light drones indefinately, even if I'm not shooting them... which I would be.
I fly both classes, I just wish soloing in a HAC didn't keep getting smacked down. My Jag is pretty nasty as is, I don't understand need for a further boost. Translation And Grammar Service Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels. Zymurgist |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 08:56:00 -
[174]
Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 17/09/2009 08:58:56 6 Pages. Time for a summary so we can stay on target.
All the speed boosts in the world won't give AFs what they crave the most - a role. The only one with a role currently is ironically the lame duck, Retribution. It does damage and damage projection and does it extremely well, just don't ask it to do anything else or it will bloody its scalp scratching its head. They are used as heavy tacklers with teeth currently simply because they can and allow survival where an interceptor dies horribly. A boost like the one proposed will benefit 3 ships and leave the rest more or less inferior. Space will be filled with Wolves, Jaguars and Ishkurs and nothing else .. just like the Rapier's, Vagabond's and Ishtar's of old.
All AB frigates are already extremely deadly when flown right and when given the chance to dictate engagement range. This has been proven time and time again in FW/low-sec where size/speed matters less than in null-sec with all the bubbles, camps and DD's.
Why is proposal bad: - It forces fittings on us. AB will become standard on AFs and by extension all other ships HAVE to fit webs, neutralizers AND drones to compete .. this leaves a lot of hulls out in the cold. - Easily defeats all weapon systems, drones to a lesser extent. Even small guns can already be tracking tanked fairly easily. - Current missiles will be moot. A Caracal already needs drones/web + assault launchers to kill an AB Crusader before the twin extender is shredded, AFs have tons more tank with comparative damage (rockets are .... not worth mentioning). Fix smaller missiles and you risk screwing over everything else. - It is overly simplistic and uninspired and will require massive amounts of rebalancing of nearly every other gun and ship in game as people realise there is no counter to what will essentially be 2+k/s cruisers with frigate signatures.
Why is it good: - Will make AFs into heavy tacklers that are able to not only hold but also catch prey. - Will be enormous fun to fly. - Will increase survivability of AFs many-fold against all size targets.
To make them useful (read: desirable) they must have a role/feature that is not inherent in another ship/class - speed, tackle, damage, tank are all covered, speed bonus is just more of the same = uninspired. So far we have had a few good suggestions for alternative bonuses (let me know if I missed one): - eWar / Web resistance. Allows for the heavy tackle role *sigh*, while disallowing the catch/intercept role. - Heat resistance. Boosts speed, tank, damage thus promoting the brawler role, already powerful when heated this gives them the time to finish the job. - Divide them into Combat and Utility Roles. Give one a bonus to tank, gank and/or evasion and the other a "passive" bonus like ability to use combat probes, RR or perhaps provide other gang benefits. - Don't change them at all. - <The missed stuff goes here>
Carry on.
|
Smabs
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 09:00:00 -
[175]
I'm not sure the change is really a good idea.
It pretty much makes neuts mandatory on almost every ship. Any ship without one will die horribly to the excessively boosted AB AF if the changes come in.
The main problem I have with AFs is the absurd cost of them. Right now it costs 20 - 30 million for a glorified T1 frigate that dies instantly to a cruiser with a neut and small guns. Not to mention people putting deadspace gear on them and sending the isk loss skyward to almost 80 million. Why not just reduce the material costs so that the market puts them at maybe 10 -15 mil? And maybe add a little powergrid, capacitor and CPU to give them a bit more strength?
|
Dasfry
Caldari Demio's Corporation Aegis Militia
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 09:07:00 -
[176]
The 15% per level is to large.
*********** Military Tactics Dasfry, CEO Demio's Corporation
|
Alexis Cato
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 09:17:00 -
[177]
Originally by: Lumy Hi Chronotis. While you're up to the AFs, could you ask around what was behind CCP's reasoning when they were assigning bonuses to Wolf and Jaguar? Because for many people it just doesn't make any sense. Jaguar is clearly the speedy one of the pair. With plenty slots for the tackle and decent shield buffer it makes natural close range AC brawler/tackler. On the other hand, Wolf with abundance of low slots (for tracking enhancers, gyros) seems to be more suited to be artillery boat. You know, the roles similar to Vagabond and Muninn respectively.
Yet, optimal bonus for Jaguar and fallof for Wolf suggets the exact opposite. So, WHY?
I'll just quote this because, yeah...
|
Cpt Branko
Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 09:29:00 -
[178]
Originally by: Smabs I'm not sure the change is really a good idea.
It pretty much makes neuts mandatory on almost every ship. Any ship without one will die horribly to the excessively boosted AB AF if the changes come in.
The problem is that vs some of them (certain Ishkur fits, Jaguar, Wolf) one neut doesn't really do anything. A dual-MSE Jaguar can survive two medium neuts and a set of T2 light drones, which poses somewhat of a problem combined with going 3km/s overheated on a AB.
Sure, some larger ships will still be viable solo - but most of them are in fact droneboats which can use a liberal amount of neuts in their highs.
Originally by: Smabs
The main problem I have with AFs is the absurd cost of them.
This is one of the two AF problems - the price as it is cannot possibly be balanced with effectiveness without making it THE definitive solo ship. That could get fixed, 30M for T2 frigates is absurd.
The second are the horrible disbalances in the class itself; the whole line of 2 midslot AFs; the worthless weapon systems like rockets; and the lack of a, sometimes needed, 4th bonus - like tracking on Wolf/Jaguar/etc.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Hun Jakuza
24th Imperial Guard
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 09:46:00 -
[179]
Dont do!!!!! We dont need new ceptor with AB. 15%/lvl speed boot is ridiculous. I see when a AF will kill a 200m ship alone . Just orbit 500m range. Zealot will die, and all ship with med sizes weapon cant hit them. Oh u will telling for others, use neut on ship. Muahahahaha I'm waiting when a Zealot swap laser to neut :D Or a Rapier change cloak to neut or drop a gun to neut. Muahahahaha
|
Opertone
Caldari Monsters
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 10:57:00 -
[180]
Originally by: BABARR Edited by: BABARR on 16/09/2009 23:01:45
Originally by: Opertone Edited by: Opertone on 16/09/2009 20:18:48
Originally by: BABARR Edited by: BABARR on 16/09/2009 15:05:31 gratz CCP to make another ship "uncatchable" What does it take to kill an AF after that? -> blob. A hac whith 2xWeb going to have to fear an AS now...
Rapier with autocannons can deal some damage and stay at 35 KM range with MWD, where tracking is irrelevant. Any recon can beat an AF, or at least not fall to it
added: Destroyer and even two destroyers can take care of an AF, it is fairly easy to track everything in a range dictating turret boat.
Track yes, but keep at range for tackle, no, PVP in eve is not like the eve tournament, you have to TACKLE for kill. And a rapier won't be able to tackle fast on a gate and kill the AF before it jump back. And if you are able to deal damage (decent damage, enought to kill an AF) whith autocanon at more than 15km, i want your fit :)
Of course you can even kill an AF, but 15% bonus per level it's simply too much. Just 5% or 7,5% will be already awesome. Dev make a patch to reduce the speed of all ship, and now they nerf the web and boost the AF speed, Big fat ass ship are already very easy to catch and often die, but now, they won't be able to kill anything. Yes, my dream is to have fight where ship stay on the field, where the agro timer on gate station or WH won't be a ****ing joke !
opsie, I must have forgotten to put it like this. Engage the AF at scramm range and tackle it with hac, invite a gang mate in rapier and let him shoot and web tackled AF from distance. Also invite artillery Hurricane and shoot the AF from 50 km away when the AF is tackled.
if AF engages one target it automatically loses control of other targets, which means sniper BS can work on them.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |