| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jim Steele
   |
Posted - 2005.03.15 16:15:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Jim Steele on 15/03/2005 16:27:12
Some exciting changes for the next patch, i cant wait especially for the stealth bombers.
Linkage
Keep up the good work this is why im so addicted to EVE damn you all!! 
Death to the Galante |
Viper SF
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 16:22:00 -
[2]
Anyone got any info or links about Stealth Bombers eg stats, skills needed etc etc
Thankyou
|
Lig Lira
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 16:23:00 -
[3]
yay!
some of my favourite bits:
 Quote:
Covert Op getting a System scan bonus
Quote:
Pilots in Space will now show a 30 minute average count
Quote:
mutual war declarations
Quote:
Adding 24 slots of Lab and Factory and a 50% increase in Offices
and yeah stealth bombers 4tw
Which PA character are you?
That's no flying saucer, that's my ass! |
Jim Steele
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 16:45:00 -
[4]
I also like the idea of agenting in lower sec space, at the moment my good quality agents are all in empire which really sucks, not that im asking for a podding i just think lower sec space is more interesting. 
Death to the Galante |
James Lyrus
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 16:58:00 -
[5]
So, small control towers, going to be 'portable stations'? It's be really need to be able to set up your refinery in the current system of choice, for a weekend mining op.
Medium control towers, could also be pretty sweet, presuming they're less intensive to keep in operation. Means there's an 'upgrade route' into the PoS market, rather than having to fork out from scratch, and hope to make a profit.
Losing T2 components out of missions? Well kind of a pity, because I rather enjoyed getting a 2mil score of a trivial L2 mission. But very understandable, and IMO fairly essential to getting PoSes profitable.
|
Chode Rizoum
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 17:22:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Chode Rizoum on 15/03/2005 17:27:29
Does this mean even people with -10 will be able to make empire agent missions ? without being affraid of going into a mission that leads him to 0.5 +
Centuria > whoot?
Centuria > you stalking me? :)
--
Nafri > then I a bird pooed on my head AND ON MY MEAL
--
http://www.subroc.net/teddybears/
|
Monty Burns
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 17:32:00 -
[7]
Why-o-why will you not just remove probes from scanners? <sob> <sniff> This would make us sooo much more of a problem for enemy safes/camps.
The time bonus is great though!
Darwin 4tw
|
ErrorS
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 17:37:00 -
[8]
I really really hope they add the ammo changes. I'm really looking forward to them.. actually, i'm waiting on them. playing less then normal(really, for other reasons) hoping to wake up one day with the ammo changes in effect
________
I'm strict Caldari
"The grass is always greener on the other side" - Maybe they're not as uber as you think?
-ErrorS |
Liu Kaskakka
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 17:39:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Chode Rizoum
Edited by: Chode Rizoum on 15/03/2005 17:27:29
Does this mean even people with -10 will be able to make empire agent missions ? without being affraid of going into a mission that leads him to 0.5 +
I was -10 when I started doing lvl 4 missions in 0.3. Only had to decline maybe 1 in 10-20 missions because it would take me to hi sec.
|
Chode Rizoum
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 17:49:00 -
[10]
ahhh nice to know ;)
always thouht it was kinda imposseple, exept 0.0 for us pirates
Centuria > whoot?
Centuria > you stalking me? :)
--
Nafri > then I a bird pooed on my head AND ON MY MEAL
--
http://www.subroc.net/teddybears/
|
mahhy
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 17:55:00 -
[11]
Wow? 
Hybrid love, system scanning, pilots in space, mutual war decs, and possibly more?
I can't wait... until the server is stable again AFTER the patch
|
Nentor
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 18:07:00 -
[12]
stealth [b]bombers[/]...
last time i checked bombers were the elite missile frigates...so if CCP introduces missile ships, does that mean we are going to see the missile change also?
|
Joshua Foiritain
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 18:14:00 -
[13]
I cant wait to see how the Hybrids are getting loved 
---------------------------
[Coreli Corporation Mainframe] |
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 18:16:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Joshua Foiritain
I cant wait to see how the Hybrids are getting loved
Hopefully just a small cap use decrease. Thats all it needs, if they really need anything at all. Nobody ever takes the drones of the megathron etc etc into account.
And tbh even if some hybrids need love its only the large blaster cap use. Everything else is fine. Powergrid reduction isnt needed, its fine as it is...
They NEED to do something to make close-range combat worthwhile, though. That is why the blasterthron is useless at the moment.
I'm mostly interested in those stealth bomber things.
|
Miss Galencia
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 18:17:00 -
[15]
Thought I was dreaming when I read this blog this afternoon.. can't wait, some good changes in there, and some "interesting" ones.. should mix things up for sure. 
|
Joshua Foiritain
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 18:20:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Joshua Foiritain on 15/03/2005 18:21:24
Originally by: Selim
Originally by: Joshua Foiritain
I cant wait to see how the Hybrids are getting loved
Hopefully just a small cap use decrease. Thats all it needs, if they really need anything at all. Nobody ever takes the drones of the megathron etc etc into account.
And tbh even if some hybrids need love its only the large blaster cap use. Everything else is fine. Powergrid reduction isnt needed, its fine as it is...
They NEED to do something to make close-range combat worthwhile, though. That is why the blasterthron is useless at the moment.
I'm mostly interested in those stealth bomber things.
Imo being able to mount Neutrons + small tank on a Mega would be cool, Electrons are boring
Oh and yeah, i can use 10 Heavy drones. Id still like some Neutrons 
The Blasterthron aint useless btw, its bad ass. Its just not usable in pretty much every situation like the Raven or Apoc.
---------------------------
[Coreli Corporation Mainframe] |
Jack Blank
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 18:26:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Nentor
stealth bombers...
last time i checked bombers were the elite missile frigates...so if CCP introduces missile ships, does that mean we are going to see the missile change also?
er my guess on this one is no. Not in this patch anyway, but hey CCP do like their supprises
|
Braaage
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 18:28:00 -
[18]
Small and medium control towers as they stand will not power an Intensified Refining Array, you will still need the full tower to power one of those. I must emphasise this is atm how it stands and may well get changed, unless that is intended.
___________________________________________
http://www.eve-tutor.com
Picture based tutorial site for EVE-Online |
Miss Galencia
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 18:33:00 -
[19]
Since this seems to be the consolidated dev blog thread i'll add this here too instead of making another..
I was kinda curious.. with the increase in lab/office/factory space, does this mean that prices are gonna fall through the floor for at least a little while because the labs etc wont be at full usage?
If so thats sort of good, but at the same time kinda undoes the work of the price increases..
I notice there was mention of this being an interim solution with other stuff planned.. but it did make me think.. 
|
Jack Blank
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 18:40:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Braaage
Small and medium control towers as they stand will not power an Intensified Refining Array, you will still need the full tower to power one of those. I must emphasise this is atm how it stands and may well get changed, unless that is intended.
Yay another gimp for small corps!
|
Jim Steele
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 18:43:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Jim Steele on 15/03/2005 18:43:28
Originally by: Miss Galencia
Since this seems to be the consolidated dev blog thread i'll add this here too instead of making another..
I was kinda curious.. with the increase in lab/office/factory space, does this mean that prices are gonna fall through the floor for at least a little while because the labs etc wont be at full usage?
If so thats sort of good, but at the same time kinda undoes the work of the price increases..
I notice there was mention of this being an interim solution with other stuff planned.. but it did make me think..
I think it will decrease inline with the current model, i.e. gradually it does mean that some people will just start hoarding and selling them again so we'll be back to square 1.
I personally think they should just make the labslots drop a random time after unrenting, this would mean impossible to guarentee a safe labslot or office trade (unless you camped a station blowing the crap out of anyone who tried to dock)
Death to the Galante |
ErrorS
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 18:44:00 -
[22]
im not happy with the CTs.. not enough CPU and forcefield range? wtf?
anyways.. I'm sure this is how it will be for isotopes
Large - 500
Medium - 250
Small - 100
doesnt' seem right.. hell, they may end up using more then this, in which case I'll probably cry.
I just wanna be able to run 4 harvesters and 4 silos.
________
I'm strict Caldari
"The grass is always greener on the other side" - Maybe they're not as uber as you think?
-ErrorS |
Draxx
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 19:33:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Miss Galencia
I was kinda curious.. with the increase in lab/office/factory space, does this mean that prices are gonna fall through the floor for at least a little while because the labs etc wont be at full usage?
The lab price will not change dramatically. It will start to decrease at a rate of 5% a week ( i think it is 5%) once there are two free slots in a station. This means that the rent will decrease slowly until all the slots are rented again, which will probably be about 10-15 seconds after the servers go up again after the patch.
So it will not have a huge effect on the prices, if it even has any at all.
If it moves kill it. If it doesn't move, kill it. It might move later. |
kieron
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 19:47:00 -
[24]
Jim got to the Blog before I did. I hate traveling and jet lag. Slapping some glue on this one and stapling it to the top of the forum.
kieron
Community Manager,
EVE Online
|
Lallante
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 19:47:00 -
[25]
nice isk sink though :)
Lall - THE Vocal Minority -
ShinRa
|
Lig Lira
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 19:57:00 -
[26]
hehe, poor kieron 
Which PA character are you?
That's no flying saucer, that's my ass! |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 19:57:00 -
[27]
Gonna quote myself here, cause i just lub my own rantings sooo much.
It's probably best psted here anyway. It's taken from a thread about the 30 min averaging of pilots in space.
I would like to add something that just came up as well.
If you average pilots in space, don't forget to do the same to jumps in last hour, lest that become the tool that gives mroe info about who's where then the pilots in space feature.
Originally by: Rod Blaine
I wonder, It's a good start, but alot is going to depend on how the average is calculated.
For example: if it takes a 3 min refresh and takes the last 10 and averages that out, any movement no matter the size in currently empty 0.0 will show as 1-2 people on the map in a string of systems. Send a scout and exact totals are known as is current location. It measn that even a fast moving group that needs to cover a greater amount of distance will still show up, albeit in less detail.
Anything showing up as 1-2 persons must then be a big group, since 1 person moving about would be averaged down to show zero players on the map.
However, if they take 10 mins refresh time and average that out over 30 mins, you will see empty systems only, and one or two points of 1-5 persons in space dotted across the map.
In now way will that add up to you knowing that something is coming, or what route it will take, expecially if circumspect routes are taken or fast moving is involved.
as I said, a good start, altho alot depends on the actual way of calculating things. I can only hope CCP lets go of the 3 min refresh and moves that up to at least a 10 min one. Emprie would hardly be affected by that anyway, and it would make a worlds of difference in the effectivity of this measure.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Rangar
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 20:17:00 -
[28]
So for 30M a week every griefer in EVE can (and will!) declare war on an alliance? And forget the raise of cost from the 2nd and 3rd war. Why should a griefer declare an 2nd war, if he gets MORE THAN FIVE THOUSAND TARGETS with the 1st war declaration?
With this change that "war"system changes even more into a pure griefer system and makes forming an alliance totally useless. If CCP doesnŠt like the alliance system they started, they should simply patch it out again. WouldnŠt be a big loss.
Rangar
Angry Customer
|
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 20:22:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Wild Rho on 15/03/2005 20:23:44
Guess alliances are going to have to adapt like everyone else and learn to actually defend themselves beyond blobbing a choke point to death eh, scary notion isn't it
Edit: Meant to add...
The map changes area damn good step in the right direction for making 0.0 alot more unpredictable and dangerous for the unprepared. I just hope they add a delay or remove the early warning system that is the local channel in 0.0 as well eventually.
Stealth bombers? Woot.
Other stuff is damn good as well
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it... |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 20:25:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Wild Rho
Guess alliances are going to have to adapt like everyone else and learn to actually defend themselves beyond blobbing a choke point to death eh, scary notion isn't it
Yes, two months form now alliances will be made up of corps willing to actually fight, not those filling up the ranks while residing in empire running missions.
There's an evolution for alliances in this, you should be glad to have t go trough this because 6 months from now it'll be the ideal starting point to rebuild your alliances when the neccesary 0.0 content has been added.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Rangar
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 20:27:00 -
[31]
Yeah,
it is really simple to defend yourself against griefers who logout as soon as a little resistance is in sight. I donŠt have a problem with the war against FoE, in fact I like it very much. I just hate, that every griefer with his little "5-man-login-gank-logout" corp can declare war (what a joke to call that a war!) on an alliance with more than 5000 members for some peanuts like 30 million a week. Even my grandma could earn 30 million a week in EVE and she has never seen this game!
Rangar
|
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 20:31:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Rangar
Yeah,
it is really simple to defend yourself against griefers who logout as soon as a little resistance is in sight. I donŠt have a problem with the war against FoE, in fact I like it very much. I just hate, that every griefer with his little "5-man-login-gank-logout" corp can declare war (what a joke to call that a war!) on an alliance with more than 5000 members for some peanuts like 30 million a week. Even my grandma could earn 30 million a week in EVE and she has never seen this game!
Rangar
Well then, at the first sign of resistance they arent going to attack a ship with a good escort then are they?
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it... |
Rangar
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 20:36:00 -
[33]
Yeah,
cool job for those escort pilots. Boring as hell, because if they are there, no griefer will show up, so no fight. But as soon as they go off due to boredom or play something more interesting, the griefers will be back and gank the unescorted ships. DonŠt take me wrong, I donŠt want a game without PvP, even if I am a more industrial oriented pilot. But I want a system, where a war is a war and not another word for "ganking by lamers".
Rangar
|
Jim Steele
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 20:57:00 -
[34]
Originally by: kieron
Jim got to the Blog before I did. I hate traveling and jet lag. Slapping some glue on this one and stapling it to the top of the forum.
wow my first sticky cheers dude, i hope you went somewhere nice on your travels
Death to the Galante |
creampuff2004
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 21:00:00 -
[35]
Edited by: creampuff2004 on 15/03/2005 21:03:29
WaaaaaaY good lad jim... beat kieron to it!!!! u gotta love the irony!!!
DEATH TO THE GALLENTE
|
Dionysus Davinci
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 21:00:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Jim Steele
Originally by: kieron
Jim got to the Blog before I did. I hate traveling and jet lag. Slapping some glue on this one and stapling it to the top of the forum.
wow my first sticky cheers dude, i hope you went somewhere nice on your travels
With a gleaming spelling error to be brought to the worlds attention
|
Nero Scuro
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 21:11:00 -
[37]
Stealth bombers = the HAC of the covert ops world? They on Sisi yet? (can't be bothered to copy+paste another copy of EVE to patch if it isn't...)
----------------
Haha, stupid monkey! Now I'VE got the Oscar! Enjoy your worthless gun! |
Shadar Ishaan
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 21:13:00 -
[38]
Originally by: kieron
Jim got to the Blog before I did. I hate traveling and jet lag. Slapping some glue on this one and stapling it to the top of the forum.
Is corp tax going to be in the upcoming patch? 
---------------
Item Trading Post
|
Gaven Lok'ri
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 21:29:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Gaven Lok''ri on 16/03/2005 01:41:11
delete and edit.
/me read too fast and missed that part
Teach me to post anywhere but intergal.
Nobiscum Deus! Ave Doriam II! |
sableye
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 21:46:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Selim
Originally by: Joshua Foiritain
I cant wait to see how the Hybrids are getting loved
Hopefully just a small cap use decrease. Thats all it needs, if they really need anything at all. Nobody ever takes the drones of the megathron etc etc into account. Quote:
at best the megathron canuse 4 extra heavy drones than the other battleships and some races even have battleships with same drone bay.
|
Arkanis
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 22:05:00 -
[41]
Can we some idea what they changes are to system scanning?
I can't test it on sisi as the option to analyse and the ability to see the probes to click them to analyse seems to disappear when I launch one.
Can you look at making covert ops maintain their cloak while dropping probes? Most people see Buzzard on the scanner and just log.
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 22:41:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Gaven Lok'ri
Edited by: Gaven Lok''ri on 15/03/2005 21:29:05
Just one question. Overall they sound good... BUT.
When are wars going to A. Be fixed so that thier prices dont randomly jump tens of millions per week.
Or B. When are we going to get those mutual wars we were promised in the next patch... BACK IN DECEMBER.
Hmm, isnt that like...both in the devblog ?
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Xeris
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 22:49:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Arkanis
Can we some idea what they changes are to system scanning?
I can't test it on sisi as the option to analyse and the ability to see the probes to click them to analyse seems to disappear when I launch one.
Can you look at making covert ops maintain their cloak while dropping probes? Most people see Buzzard on the scanner and just log.
Well, to be fair the scan probes show up on scan too, so thats not an issue. Changing the scan times will fix that.
Too lazy to get my sig changed |
Arkanis
|
Posted - 2005.03.15 23:43:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Arkanis on 15/03/2005 23:43:47
Originally by: Xeris
Well, to be fair the scan probes show up on scan too, so thats not an issue. Changing the scan times will fix that.
I know, but most often than not people don't care when they see probes on scanner.
Just when they see a covert ops and then when it disappears from scanner they log.
I don't know what the covert ops bonus to probes is because there's nothing on sisi and the scanner seems to be bugged so I can't test the new time.
But anything quicker than 300 seconds is quite nice.
|
Mythra
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 00:08:00 -
[45]
Anyone got any stats on these steath bombers?
|
Crusari
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 00:39:00 -
[46]
Woohoo! Hybrids getting some love \o/
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 00:51:00 -
[47]
I'd really like to hear more about those bombers...
|
SkyLander
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 01:10:00 -
[48]
Still hoping that EW changes get cut, would make my month.
__________________________________________________
|
olyyyyy
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 02:11:00 -
[49]
2 things:
-ECM for teh loose on sisi.
-unacceptable alliance system (bwahahahaha 30M). You can as well unpatch it since imo we will simply stop using it. And imo most minded alliances will do the same. You should seriously come up with something better than that.
Galaga (Galaxian - XIF corp) And yes, Olyyy is on our KOS list so she enjoys stirring the "flames" ( 2004.05.25 ) |
Exarch
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 02:24:00 -
[50]
a post in the ships and modules forum has a SS of a few of the elite kestral stats.. and im hoping it was a joke or a very old SS.
3 launchers 1 turrent and a utility slot.. no special resists and no extra slots besides the extra high you can't use, and 1 less missile hardpoint lol. and with cruiser speed.
unless it can fire heavy missiles or while cloaked i have no idea what it could be used for.
|
Branmuffin
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 02:39:00 -
[51]
I think the extra slot is for a cloak.
|
Iaukea Asarnil
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 05:56:00 -
[52]
On the one hand: Cool stuff, well done.
On the other: Still waiting on system-wide belts, dust clouds, comet mining, corp tax...
_____________________________________________
The most pessimistic sod in Eve, and proud of it
The end of the universe....coming SOON[tm]
Beware of geeks bearing gifs |
ElectroSister4
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 08:34:00 -
[53]
Edited by: ElectroSister4 on 16/03/2005 08:34:40
If you do the hybrid changes and dont mess with the warp scramblers, this looks awsome
--
"Its better to burn out then to fade away" - Kurgan
|
MaiLina KaTar
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 09:34:00 -
[54]
Edited by: MaiLina KaTar on 16/03/2005 09:34:21
I'd really appreciate some info about Stealth Bombers and system scanning.
Any chance of us getting a little blog with a few more details about some of the new stuff you mentioned?
Mai's Idealog |
Jim Steele
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 10:48:00 -
[55]
Originally by: MaiLina KaTar
Edited by: MaiLina KaTar on 16/03/2005 09:34:21
I'd really appreciate some info about Stealth Bombers and system scanning.
Any chance of us getting a little blog with a few more details about some of the new stuff you mentioned?
stealth bombers arnt on the markets or listed, so i doubt they are in this patch mabye oveour was getting excited.
As for other things the 30min delay seting on the map would be cool if it actually worked, selected this and my map screen hung on me lastnight..
It could have just been server lag, ill have to retest befor submitting a bug report.
Small and medium pos dont tell you how much ice is needed to keep them running.
Death to the Galante |
ollobrains
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 11:06:00 -
[56]
if we could get a definite response on stealth bombers then they might be in the next patch if not maybe one after - im still going to try to find em on the test server though (that is where new stuff will be i guess)
Wonder if they are giong to mirror the data updates again.
|
Arud
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 12:01:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Jim Steele
Edited by: Jim Steele on 15/03/2005 18:43:28
Originally by: Miss Galencia
Since this seems to be the consolidated dev blog thread i'll add this here too instead of making another..
I was kinda curious.. with the increase in lab/office/factory space, does this mean that prices are gonna fall through the floor for at least a little while because the labs etc wont be at full usage?
If so thats sort of good, but at the same time kinda undoes the work of the price increases..
I notice there was mention of this being an interim solution with other stuff planned.. but it did make me think..
I think it will decrease inline with the current model, i.e. gradually it does mean that some people will just start hoarding and selling them again so we'll be back to square 1.
I personally think they should just make the labslots drop a random time after unrenting, this would mean impossible to guarentee a safe labslot or office trade (unless you camped a station blowing the crap out of anyone who tried to dock)
like this idea
|
ollobrains
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 12:03:00 -
[58]
lab slots costs should go down otherwise the rental costs will drain more corp funds - guess as long as they are placed in a widespread pattern then things should be ok - finding a factory slot is pretty easy its the research slots that are a bnit harder. But this should act as a short term solution
|
Mort Dyken
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 12:37:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Mort Dyken on 16/03/2005 12:42:32
If the charge per corp in alliance for wars is exploitable, why not charge a fixed sum for each pilot in alliance? More targets = higher costs, setting up alt corps won't help.
Example: 20K for each pilot in alliance x 5000 pilots = 100mill. per week.
|
Jim Steele
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 13:13:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Mort Dyken
If the charge per corp in alliance for wars is exploitable, why not charge a fixed sum for each pilot in alliance? More targets = higher costs, setting up alt corps won't help.
Example: 20K for each pilot in alliance x 5000 pilots = 100mill. per week.
your logic is flawed since on the same line each allience could just create alt noobs using the buddy program for example.
Death to the Galante |
Dionysus Davinci
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 14:21:00 -
[61]
Originally by: olyyyyy
2 things:
-ECM for teh loose on sisi.
-unacceptable alliance system (bwahahahaha 30M). You can as well unpatch it since imo we will simply stop using it. And imo most minded alliances will do the same. You should seriously come up with something better than that.
Please, I don't think the devs want the 'alliance' based on the fact wars are unaffordable. Stop whining and work to control your space and trade lanes.
|
olyyyyy
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 14:32:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Dionysus Davinci
Originally by: olyyyyy
2 things:
-ECM for teh loose on sisi.
-unacceptable alliance system (bwahahahaha 30M). You can as well unpatch it since imo we will simply stop using it. And imo most minded alliances will do the same. You should seriously come up with something better than that.
Please, I don't think the devs want the 'alliance' based on the fact wars are unaffordable. Stop whining and work to control your space and trade lanes.
Stop saying crap. Eve is not a Doom-like. Devs are doing a terrible mistake that will simply lead to the most logical solution: disband ingame alliances and go back to unofficial alliances style.
As simple as that.
Galaga (Galaxian - XIF corp) And yes, Olyyy is on our KOS list so she enjoys stirring the "flames" ( 2004.05.25 ) |
David Corbett
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 14:44:00 -
[63]
30m ISK to send thousands of people to war is pointless. I could make that easily in an hour and a half of mining in 0.0. Some people make that in a single mission, or a single decent loot drop. That's a pointlessly small amount of ISK, especially considering that a group of about 300 people (about the size of the smaller alliances) could secure that much ISK in less than a minute's time.
|
olyyyyy
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 16:15:00 -
[64]
Edited by: olyyyyy on 16/03/2005 16:15:52
50M is still not acceptable. It's not changing the amount like this that will fix anything.
changes to alliance system are necessary. Not cheap solutions that will ruin gameplay for the next 6 months.
Galaga (Galaxian - XIF corp) And yes, Olyyy is on our KOS list so she enjoys stirring the "flames" ( 2004.05.25 ) |
Arud
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 18:33:00 -
[65]
How about some... any .... advantages of forming an allliance
real advantages that count
not alliance chat
not alliance evemail
how about something like, alliance market... or something
|
Paw Sandberg
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 19:08:00 -
[66]
no corp tax though 
Thank You
Paw Sandberg
for all your BPC needs see
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
|
Saladin
|
Posted - 2005.03.16 21:58:00 -
[67]
No one commented on the pulse nerf, so I will. I am totally OK with a range nerf. My only problem is that in the past CCP has nerfed things in more ways than it said it did. I'm worried it will end up being a range nerf and then a stealth tracking and damage nerf we find out about by mistake. |
Daxit
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 01:03:00 -
[68]
Originally by: olyyyyy
Devs are doing a terrible mistake that will simply lead to the most logical solution: disband ingame alliances and go back to unofficial alliances style.
As simple as that.
I completely agree. If this change goes into place as it is presented currently, and there remain no counterbalancing benefits to alliance membership, then the alliance system will be abandoned within a couple of months or less.
For all the great changes proposed, I just have to wonder what CCP was smoking when they decided this horrible method for war cost calculation.
|
Branmuffin
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 06:30:00 -
[69]
POS should allow you to place sentries at each gate.
Small POS give you one per gate, medium 2, large 3... up to 8 per gate.
That would FILL 0.0 with POS'
|
Kyle Caldrel
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 07:52:00 -
[70]
these sentrys better do *****ers for dmg. Gaurd your own damn systems!
|
Jim Steele
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 10:14:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Branmuffin
POS should allow you to place sentries at each gate.
Small POS give you one per gate, medium 2, large 3... up to 8 per gate.
That would FILL 0.0 with POS'
yeah brilliant idea, just isolate alliences so they can mine ark allday without having to guard there own space.
Death to the Galante |
Shania Twain
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 12:24:00 -
[72]
If CCP want to increase PvP, they donŠt need this crappy war system. They should just make implants easy to replace after a podkill. Then the number of PvP pilots would increase dramatically.
|
Helmut 314
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 12:49:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Originally by: Wild Rho
Guess alliances are going to have to adapt like everyone else and learn to actually defend themselves beyond blobbing a choke point to death eh, scary notion isn't it
Yes, two months form now alliances will be made up of corps willing to actually fight, not those filling up the ranks while residing in empire running missions.
There's an evolution for alliances in this, you should be glad to have t go trough this because 6 months from now it'll be the ideal starting point to rebuild your alliances when the neccesary 0.0 content has been added.
Thats very true, the alliances will evolve quite a bit towards pure PVP if this goes through. That is however a very narrowminded view of what an alliance is and could be.
PvP is a major part of the game and of 0.0 life. But its not the only part. I can see how you yourself and your friend BoB would like this. Good fights, no "despicable" carebears mining, just one big free-for all in 0.0 where everyone is happy and almost grateful that you come knocking.
Building the true EXODUS takes more than PvP:ers though, it takes industrialists too. Designing a system where anyone for 30 million a week can do completely legal piracy against any alliance makes that less appealing. Successfully fighting a small pvp corp in empire space is near on impossible. They have to be really stupid and/or careless to get hurt by an alliance. A small corp can do quite a bit of damage against an alliance with minimal effort.
Escorting everyone who is not a pvp:er when they go to Empire would be a logistical and tactical nightmare. For every hauler you would need 1-4 protectors to be reasonably effective. Convoying is a possible solution, but thats really cumbersome and makes you an even fatter target. Coordinating the effort would be several fulltime jobs.
Alliances should really only be allowed to make war on other alliances. That is the real solution to the legal piracy solution. Of course you could train an alt to empire control 5, pay up 1 bill and start an alliance, but Id imagine that very few would actually invest that much for uncertain returns.
___________________________________
Trying is the first step of failure
- Homer J Simpson |
Xavier Cardde
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 14:09:00 -
[74]
Edited by: Xavier Cardde on 17/03/2005 14:13:14
if CCP goes through with making it yet easier to declare war on an alliance than they seriously are fracking retarded.
forming an actual alliance has no point.
|
Lucre
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 15:41:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Dionysus Davinci
Please, I don't think the devs want the 'alliance' based on the fact wars are unaffordable. Stop whining and work to control your space and trade lanes.
Actually, one of my corp mates petitioned the current alliance war system as a bug. In reply, the GM told him precisely that - that the cost should become prohibitive for the declarer.
Of course given this dev blog, it would seem that that GM was totally wrong and they're *meant* to be perfectly affordable...
Sorry, devs but this is stupid. Result will either be that alliances revert to pre-Exodus out-of-game alliances and/or that alliance corps will keep non-alliance sister corps to shuffle people into whilst working in Empire. Is either of those an intended consequence?
|
Lucre
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 15:48:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Saladin
No one commented on the pulse nerf, so I will. I am totally OK with a range nerf. My only problem is that in the past CCP has nerfed things in more ways than it said it did. I'm worried it will end up being a range nerf and then a stealth tracking and damage nerf we find out about by mistake.
Look at the graphs - because your crystals don't shoot as far the tracking affects you more and hence the peak damage - even on BS targets - goes down by a significant amount. So yes, it's not just a range nerf.
This change will savage the Apoc - I'm not at all sure it will be a viable npc-hunting ship after this - whilst not significantly affecting the gankerGeddon which was supposed to be the problem. Great fix...
|
Nero Scuro
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 16:39:00 -
[77]
Wow, I'm sure glad the Devs aren't testing any of this stuff or listening to player feedback, because if they were then all the moronic whining about EVE suddenly sucking after one change to something sure would be a waste of time.
*And yes, get ready for it, it's the annoying rolling eyes emoticon! Don't you hate that guy?*
----------------
Haha, stupid monkey! Now I'VE got the Oscar! Enjoy your worthless gun! |
Chavok
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 18:51:00 -
[78]
the 30 minute avg for pilots in space, will cause more grief then anything CCP has ever done.
prediction - map will be worthless, ganking and griefing will reach all time highs, and exedus will be from eve.
|
Dianabolic
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 18:53:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Chavok
the 30 minute avg for pilots in space, will cause more grief then anything CCP has ever done.
prediction - map will be worthless, ganking and griefing will reach all time highs, and exedus will be from eve.
That's assuming more people come in to 0.0 away from their ghey lvl 4 agent missions.
|
Hawk Firestorm
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 19:09:00 -
[80]
Edited by: Hawk Firestorm on 17/03/2005 19:11:17
Originally by: Miss Galencia
Since this seems to be the consolidated dev blog thread i'll add this here too instead of making another..
I was kinda curious.. with the increase in lab/office/factory space, does this mean that prices are gonna fall through the floor for at least a little while because the labs etc wont be at full usage?
If so thats sort of good, but at the same time kinda undoes the work of the price increases..
I notice there was mention of this being an interim solution with other stuff planned.. but it did make me think..
No basically day 1 they put it in the scammers have all the extras and it's back to square 1.
There is no real interim solution other than the proper one for this and that's to limit slots by account/player/corp, not by station.
And about the only thing that's going to make POS more accessable is to change their method of upkeep from labour intensive Ice mining and hauling etc into just plain ole ISK.
|
John Blackthorn
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 21:04:00 -
[81]
Why not just allow corp vs corp and alliance vs alliance wars. NOT corp vs alliance? Also alliance should have a minium number of people before they can declair war on somone.
-BT
|
Dianabolic
|
Posted - 2005.03.17 22:42:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Shania Twain
Well,
"Exodus" has made it for me. After just getting another 5 griefer "wars" within a minute I leave our 10 alliance "wars" for the masochistic people who want to pay CCP for being griefed all the time. This game was great, but now it is not more than counterstrike. Accout is cancelled. If CCP doesnŠt recognize the online numbers going down they might notice their accounts going down.
Can I have your stuff?
Do you have a cov ops pilot on your acct? Can I have that, too?
|
laotse
|
Posted - 2005.03.18 00:10:00 -
[83]
dont make new anoucnt ment read the forums and dont close forums
|
Nero Scuro
|
Posted - 2005.03.18 01:28:00 -
[84]
Originally by: laotse
dont make new anoucnt ment read the forums and dont close forums
The... hell?
----------------
Haha, stupid monkey! Now I'VE got the Oscar! Enjoy your worthless gun! |
Branmuffin
|
Posted - 2005.03.18 01:54:00 -
[85]
Well ostensibly the Sentries would be tied to the POS, so they have to be online for one thing.
Next they would do GOOD Damage, but not OMGWTF Damage. They would also have normal locking time.
Enough to become something that assault forces have to deal with, either by bringing larger slower ships, using lightning tactics and warping out before they can lock etc.
|
Sybylle
|
Posted - 2005.03.18 13:50:00 -
[86]
Originally by: John Blackthorn
Why not just allow corp vs corp and alliance vs alliance wars. NOT corp vs alliance? Also alliance should have a minium number of people before they can declair war on somone.
-BT
No...simply because alliance would have too much power afterward.
However, it would be more simple to allow Corp declaring war to specific corp in alliance, instead of involving all corps within the alliance.
Each member corporation would have to support the war cost if they engage, at an increasing rate proportionnally to the member count, so if the Alliance wants to charge a corporation with a lot of ships, it would also have to pay a lot.
This cost would also apply if corporation engage mercs, including hired merc corporation to the War Cost bill...
This would imply another war system change however...
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <)=Oveur (proof)
"Jumping 50 systems I can like, have sex 150 times during that period" |
At'lana Tir'freven
|
Posted - 2005.03.19 19:43:00 -
[87]
IMHO alliances should only be able to attack other alliances ... corperations against other corperations etc ... set a weekly/monthly operation fee to maintain the alliance infrastructure and keeping the accountants/lawyers paid that all major organizations have ( ie overhead ) that way you allow for corps to wage war against other corps if ppl have problems. Also set a minimum number of members req'd to form an alliance so u dont have 5 1man corps build an 'allaince'.
|
Peep
|
Posted - 2005.03.20 02:50:00 -
[88]
Originally by: At'lana Tir'freven
IMHO alliances should only be able to attack other alliances ... corperations against other corperations etc ... set a weekly/monthly operation fee to maintain the alliance infrastructure and keeping the accountants/lawyers paid that all major organizations have ( ie overhead ) that way you allow for corps to wage war against other corps if ppl have problems. Also set a minimum number of members req'd to form an alliance so u dont have 5 1man corps build an 'allaince'.
What if you allowed the alliance to up the price on a war dec. Say a 5 man corp dec war on an alliance in order to grief carebears. The alliance in turn can pay an amount to up the price.
5 man corp dec war - 50m
Alliance pays 500m to up the price.
5 man corp has to pay 550m per week to continue.
Alliance has to pay 500m per week for the duration.
This would make it unprofitable for a small corp if the reason for the war was just for piracy.
......just a thought
|
TheNecromancer
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 06:33:00 -
[89]
small pos..in 0.4
ones again the carebars is left out :(
this game has become a true and only PVP game...
why dont you just remove empire space and get it over with.
|
Fuse
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 10:07:00 -
[90]
I have not seen stealth bombers yet. They are not available for testing is that correct?
0.o It's not you... no wait it is you. |
Rangars Uncle
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 11:47:00 -
[91]
Of course you havenŠt seen them. They are stealth, remember?
|
Jim Steele
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 12:39:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Fuse
They are not available for testing is that correct?
Yes the devs want to keep them to themselfs, damn them
Death to the Galante |
Dianabolic
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 12:56:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Peep
Originally by: At'lana Tir'freven
IMHO alliances should only be able to attack other alliances ... corperations against other corperations etc ... set a weekly/monthly operation fee to maintain the alliance infrastructure and keeping the accountants/lawyers paid that all major organizations have ( ie overhead ) that way you allow for corps to wage war against other corps if ppl have problems. Also set a minimum number of members req'd to form an alliance so u dont have 5 1man corps build an 'allaince'.
What if you allowed the alliance to up the price on a war dec. Say a 5 man corp dec war on an alliance in order to grief carebears. The alliance in turn can pay an amount to up the price.
5 man corp dec war - 50m
Alliance pays 500m to up the price.
5 man corp has to pay 550m per week to continue.
Alliance has to pay 500m per week for the duration.
This would make it unprofitable for a small corp if the reason for the war was just for piracy.
......just a thought
That's a pretty good idea.
|
Dionysus Davinci
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 19:31:00 -
[94]
Edited by: Dionysus Davinci on 21/03/2005 19:36:45
Originally by: Peep
Originally by: At'lana Tir'freven
IMHO alliances should only be able to attack other alliances ...
Alliances don't work that way. They're suppose to be if your attacked, we all come to that memebers aid. Not, kekekeke lets form up and make a huge alt filled alliance so we don't actually have to fight to defend our members.
Small corps should be allowed and affordably attack an alliance. What should make it unattractive is attacking a large alliance will put you vastly outnumbered, not some artificall huge 100 million isk war bill.
Personally it should be like 1 million a corp with war cost not to exceed 50 million base cost. This way small alliances don't form and get protection with a huge war costs and large alliances don't inflate themselves to protect themselves using war costs and avoiding wars and being big  alliances.
|
meowcat
|
Posted - 2005.03.22 09:47:00 -
[95]
meh.
still no missile agility :-(
~~~~)\~~~~~\o/~~~~
yeah but no but yeah but no but |
Jim Steele
|
Posted - 2005.03.22 15:09:00 -
[96]
Stealth bombers have appeared under covert ops ships, i wonder how this will perform, but as i cant fly them yet ill have to wait.
I think these are just placeholders at the moment.
Death to the Galante |
zincol
|
Posted - 2005.03.22 16:41:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Jim Steele
Stealth bombers have appeared under covert ops ships, i wonder how this will perform, but as i cant fly them yet ill have to wait.
I think these are just placeholders at the moment.
screenshots?
w00t!
|
w0rmy
|
Posted - 2005.03.23 10:13:00 -
[98]
Originally by: zincol
screenshots?
w00t!
Paint the shiney colours of a Harpy on a Kestrel
|
ollobrains
|
Posted - 2005.03.24 08:55:00 -
[99]
what will be the weaknesses of the stealth bombers ?
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.03.24 11:09:00 -
[100]
Originally by: ollobrains
what will be the weaknesses of the stealth bombers ?
thy have to use cruise launchers
Wanna fly with me?
|
Jack Blank
|
Posted - 2005.03.24 19:30:00 -
[101]
yeah cruise launchers have a stupidly low refire rate, i say up the rate and nerf cruise missiles in siege launchers.
|
Dionysus Davinci
|
Posted - 2005.03.24 22:17:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Jim Steele
Stealth bombers have appeared under covert ops ships, i wonder how this will perform, but as i cant fly them yet ill have to wait.
I think these are just placeholders at the moment.
In other news, the Caldar Stealth bomber will be choice with its extra launcher and having the same mids and lows as the others.
Whoever gets the BPO is going to be one rich mother****** while the other ones will only be demand because the caldaria will be a hard find.
|
John Blackthorn
|
Posted - 2005.03.25 01:24:00 -
[103]
The Caldari Bomber is called the Manticore and it looks just like the kestral.
It has 5 high slots, 3 missle, 1 turret.
4 medium, and 2 low.
The bonuses are a 25% to speed while cloaked per level. 19% reduction for cruse missle power grid, and 5% to kenetic damage for cruse missles.
--------------------
My thoughts is that this is a frigate and it should have the reduction for heavy missle launchers not cruise. And it should be able to use the covert-op.
-----------------------
John Blackthorn
|
Lagar
|
Posted - 2005.03.25 15:28:00 -
[104]
it is able to use covert op it's not just showing that detail.. same thing about the heavy assault ships.. they dont show the resist bonuses but you know it's there.. right?
|
Arte
|
Posted - 2005.03.25 18:28:00 -
[105]
Stealth bomber screen pics from the "ships and modules" link
Nemesis(Gallente)
Purifier(Amarr)
Dagger(Minmatar)
Manticore(Caldari)
Just hope we get to play with them before they're released. PLEASE.
|
Garnet Strife
|
Posted - 2005.03.25 23:29:00 -
[106]
Bad April fools or summin?
I WANT A SIG! |
RShade
|
Posted - 2005.03.26 18:22:00 -
[107]
For the mods being made to hybrids, the only powergrid mod i think that needs to be made is dropping med hybrid powergrid requirements just slightly.. like maybe 20 points or so. For example with the railguns, drop the 250's to like 200 (-25 from current) and the 200mm down to 160ish. That way it keeps it more inline in a decent progression from the very low powergrid requirements of the Dual 150mm. I just think its kind of pathetic when even with the Deimos for example (with the increased powergrid over the regular Thorax), you have to loose over half of your low slots to powergrid mods just to have all 5 hardpoints with 250's or Neutrons, then barely have room left over for any equipment. my 2 isk.
|
Baytt
|
Posted - 2005.03.27 01:44:00 -
[108]
Edited by: Baytt on 27/03/2005 01:44:14
Originally by: RShade
For the mods being made to hybrids, the only powergrid mod i think that needs to be made is dropping med hybrid powergrid requirements just slightly.. like maybe 20 points or so. For example with the railguns, drop the 250's to like 200 (-25 from current) and the 200mm down to 160ish. That way it keeps it more inline in a decent progression from the very low powergrid requirements of the Dual 150mm. I just think its kind of pathetic when even with the Deimos for example (with the increased powergrid over the regular Thorax), you have to loose over half of your low slots to powergrid mods just to have all 5 hardpoints with 250's or Neutrons, then barely have room left over for any equipment. my 2 isk.
ok starters, to get the high dmg a deimos is campable of u dont need to go for the highest dmgest weapons, fitting 5 electron blaster 2s on the deimos can still very easily take down a bs solo
2nd, rail guns on a deimos lol
|
RShade
|
Posted - 2005.03.27 10:11:00 -
[109]
Yea i know the lower end blasters are fine when your in pvp. But try using that on a deimos in a complex when you got 20+ cruisers surrounding your butt, even with an armor tank setup you cant handle that. With range you can pick your targets off in waves and actually survive a complex solo when the biggest ship allowed in the complex is a hvy assault ship.
|
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2005.03.27 16:29:00 -
[110]
Does anyone know if stealth bombers can warp when cloaked? Or will they be required to warp in, cloak and then get into position?
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it... |
Stone Blackmouth
|
Posted - 2005.03.27 19:07:00 -
[111]
So I think the patch will be delayed because of all the recent server issues?
--
"There's isk in those darn hills!!!" |
Alt32
|
Posted - 2005.03.27 22:46:00 -
[112]
Originally by: Stone Blackmouth
So I think the patch will be delayed because of all the recent server issues?
I am thinking the same thing.
I am a freakin Alt. What are you going to do about it? |
dimensionZ
|
Posted - 2005.03.27 23:03:00 -
[113]
Next patch, new 0.0 conquerable stations services ? I sure hope so ....
|
Orb Lati
|
Posted - 2005.03.28 08:03:00 -
[114]
IMHO the changes to agent runners and the Tech2 drops is not enough to help to pOS industry.
Agent runners should get nothing that is in direct competition for the products of a POS or the ICE miners.
"We Worship Strength, because it is through strength that all other values are made possible" |
Inacio Fonseck
|
Posted - 2005.03.28 20:51:00 -
[115]
Originally by: John Blackthorn
--------------------
My thoughts is that this is a frigate and it should have the reduction for heavy missle launchers not cruise. And it should be able to use the covert-op.
-----------------------
John Blackthorn
Frig lvl5 = 98.25% reduction in cruise launcher PG
unless i'm mistaken...
|
Aeron Kokolen
|
Posted - 2005.03.28 21:53:00 -
[116]
/me wonders why the Caldari Stealth bomber gets a bonus for having levels in the MINMATAR FRIGATE!!! skill.
|
Lygos
|
Posted - 2005.03.28 23:57:00 -
[117]
Looks like they have an innate resistance to ECM, especially bursts with their huge targetting strength. Moderately large signature radii for a frigate. They can only use the inferior cloaks I guess, which pretty much restricts it to joining defensive blobs even though those focus on gank strength.
I haven't grasped the propulsion strength adjustments either. If they are firing cruise missiles for real, the caldari bomber is the champ hands down with the extra missile slot.
These things look really vulnerable to enemy frigates and cruisers of course, as they should be. (And drones and hell.. citadel torpedoes even.) The innate resists seem nice, especially on the minmatar antennae thing.
Somehow I think this will work out not at all as the person who dreamt them up planned.
|
Arte
|
Posted - 2005.03.29 12:09:00 -
[118]
Edited by: Arte on 30/03/2005 14:00:19
Originally by: Inacio Fonseck
Frig lvl5 = 98.25% reduction in cruise launcher PG
unless i'm mistaken...
Makes for 17mw powergrid requirement for a cruise launcher on all the ships except the maticore (caldari) which gives a 5% bonus to powergrid requirements for the cruise launchers for each level of covert ops as well which means that they will require 13mw for each launcher with covert ops at lvl 4.
The ship itself has 30mw powergrid total (37.5 with engineering at lvl 5) so it very much needs that extra bonus.
|
kieron
|
Posted - 2005.03.29 17:55:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Stone Blackmouth
So I think the patch will be delayed because of all the recent server issues?
The server issues are completely unrelated to the patch and should not have an effect on its deployment. An announcement on the patch status will be made later this week.
kieron
Community Manager,
EVE Online
|
Dloan
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 11:34:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Wild Rho
Does anyone know if stealth bombers can warp when cloaked? Or will they be required to warp in, cloak and then get into position?
Unless they can fit the Cov Op cloak you will have to warp in, cloak, and get into position. The specs do not give any bonus for using the Cov Op cloak and I don't see this as an omission as someone else has said. The speed bonuses are there to counteract the heavy speed penalties imposed by the lesser cloaks.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |