Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 28 post(s) |

Schanah
SnaiLs aNd FroGs Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:14:00 -
[481] - Quote
Rebalancing is good, making everything the same is stupid.
Quote:Breaking Destroyers and Battlecruisers skills into four racial versions with an identical training multiplier (thus making it four times harder to get all races trained)
And you say it should help new player ? split time in 4 for those skills and it'ill be faster to specialize. |

Celgar Thurn
Department 10
63
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:18:00 -
[482] - Quote
"..........what are we going to do now with all that precious free time?"
Erm obvious really. You could fix the Corporation/Alliance Roles & Permissions interface with a view to making it user friendly and in the case of Player Owned Stations (POSes) make it possible for corporations to allow their members to use those facilities with a far higher degree of security so that said POS will not be robbed etc. Phew. That sentence was too long. 
If you do this you will make so many EVE pilots happy that you will wonder if they have all won the lottery. Nuff said.  |

Alx Warlord
The Scope Gallente Federation
191
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:20:00 -
[483] - Quote
Why the Eos looks like a brutix other then a myrmdon?
Maybe the t2 ships should have a different hull base model... it would looks better then the same hull painted in different colours.
Also you could revamp the POS system... and all the other stuff that you promissed... Please read this! > New POS system ( Block Built - Starbasecraft) Please read this! >-á[Debate] - ISK SINK |

Quesa
D00M. Northern Coalition.
12
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:22:00 -
[484] - Quote
Foolish Bob wrote:It's bonuses. Please please stop saying that. Bonus is good person. Good thing would be bonum which as data is the plural noun to datum makes the plural bona but given it's all mangled (clearly) I think we're allowed to modernise in this case. Especially as I have to accept people using data as a singular noun despite having the opposite drilled into me, so you all get to accept that.  Also fun fact: the plural of octopus should be octopodes because the -pus part is greek. Not that I say anything other than octopi but I just like the fact  It's also the plural of Bonus although I'm not using the special character over the 'i'. |

Neddy Fox
FireStar Inc Curatores Veritatis Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:23:00 -
[485] - Quote
I'm also one of the 7 with maxxed out Warfare skills :) Well, MD5 is missing, but meh.
Question : As I bugreported this at least once, when you're revisiting the bonusses, will you also fix the broken wing command bonus ? The WC will has never had any bonusses from the FC, where SC's get fleet +índ wing bonusses.
Also, a ship with active links with LESSER skills as squadcommander overrules a wingcommander with better skills (and links running). (As example, an Orca SC with links running gives HIS bonusses to squad, even when there's a Rorqual Wing commander in fleet).
|

Klymer
Hedion University Amarr Empire
72
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:32:00 -
[486] - Quote
Quote:Yes comrades, battlecruisers are indeed next to get through the tiericide revolution. LetGÇÖs face it, they had it coming, as current tier 2 variations perform too well while tier1s are found wanting. With this in mind, the plan is to adjust total slot layout to 17 on all of them and split them into two categories depending on their expected role.
so...
Harbinger: lose a slot Oracle: slots unchanged Prophecy: gain a slot
Drake: lose a slot Ferox: gain a slot Naga: slots unchanged
Brutix: gain a slot Myrmidon: slots unchanged Talos: slots unchanged
Cyclone: slots unchanged Hurricane: lose a slot Tornado: slots unchanged
tell me I'm daft and I'm not reading that correctly.....
|

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:37:00 -
[487] - Quote
Klymer wrote:Quote:Yes comrades, battlecruisers are indeed next to get through the tiericide revolution. LetGÇÖs face it, they had it coming, as current tier 2 variations perform too well while tier1s are found wanting. With this in mind, the plan is to adjust total slot layout to 17 on all of them and split them into two categories depending on their expected role. so... Harbinger: lose a slot Oracle: slots unchanged Prophecy: gain a slot Drake: lose a slot Ferox: gain a slot Naga: slots unchanged Brutix: gain a slot Myrmidon: slots unchanged Talos: slots unchanged Cyclone: slots unchanged Hurricane: lose a slot Tornado: slots unchanged tell me I'm daft and I'm not reading that correctly.....
You are as droneboats always have one less slot than the rest. |

Herren Varno
Perkone Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:41:00 -
[488] - Quote
Restricting the use of offgrid boosting will be bad for the smallest scale of pvp (i.e. most of the pvp in Low-sec).
It will introduce a significant advantage to gangs which are large enough to warrant fielding a dedicated booster pilot, and will discourage fights between gangs at either side of that threshold. And ultimately remove the viability of those smaller gangs.
Ignoring Logistics, which are not present in the majority of Low-sec engagement, links provide the greatest advantage to active tanks, and give the smallest gangs (1-6) the required edge to fight gangs 50-100% larger (which are more commonly buffer tanked.) They actively encourage smaller gangs to fight numerically superior forces; and in Low-sec PvP, where a couple of additional pilots on one side can be a significant difference, giving us the ability to up-engage through the use of link alts and active tanks is crucial to keeping the gudfites flowing.
There are plenty of ways to fix the perceived problems of OGB in null without stamping on low-sec, so how about using a more considered solution than nerfing link alts into the ground?
If you must go through with it, then how about a buff to active tanks, and the removal of gate guns so we can at least reliably use gate mechanics to up-engage. |

Jack Mayhem
Kaer Industries
7
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:41:00 -
[489] - Quote
Klymer wrote: so...
Harbinger: lose a slot
Harbinger definitely doesn't need a nerf. However good solution would be: - 1 low - capacitor recharge for lasers tank bonus instead of laser cap usage |

Iam a Spy2
solo and loveing it
32
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:43:00 -
[490] - Quote
first off Great get rid of off grid boosting you what fleet boost risk your command/ t 3 ships so HTFU.
2nd t2 Command ships should have higher boost over t3's given t3's are jack of all trades master of none and to fly a battlecruiser command ship takes longer to train then any t3.
3rd Not happy about the mega nerf. and thats what its going to be. Domi is lacking alot and could use love. The mega is the back bone to Gal pvp bs's because the hype just sucks and its ulgy and domi only good for neuts/ rr and drones and its even ulgyer there a hung over CCP SoundWave "well i can say that i saw the vid ccp posted". the only real boat for pvp in the bs class for gal is the mega dont turn it into something like the typhoon.
If you change the mega Leave the Navy untouched it should have thick armor and can reach 400k ehp with the right skills,implants and fit and boost. Take that away from the Gal and amarr, minmatar and cal. will walk all over the gal. For takeing highs and given them the mega is they only bs worth a damn in Gal hanger for t1 bs's.
So over all i like what comeing other then the mega nerf. |
|

Celgar Thurn
Department 10
63
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:54:00 -
[491] - Quote
Regarding ships using mindlinks & giving boosts:
1) I personally have no problem with boosting ships not being allowed to boost within a POS forcefield EXCEPT for the Rorqual or any other ship that is providing mining boost links ONLY. Mining should kept apart from combat. 2) I personally feel that ships should still be able to apply boosts to their respective fleets while being in the same system UNLESS you implement a different method of obtaining mindlinks so that they are far cheaper and therefore disposable financially speaking. They currently sell in the region of 100 million ISK each and I would propose a price of 20 million ISK would be not too cheap but still somewhat 'disposable'. Instead of dropping or as rewards from missions they would be on sale at LP stores in high sec systems but probably not at FW LP stores. I have another pilot trained up with lvl 5 in most of the mindlink related skills but at 100+ million a pop I would be loathe to risk that kind of loss in battle on a regular basis and I doubt most pilots would want to do that either. So on that basis I suggest you either leave the off grid boosting alone OR apply a far cheaper buying method for COMBAT ONLY related mindlinks with the removal of off-grid boosting. I also suggest you leave the rarity of mining mindlinks as it currently stands as making them more readily available would affect the EVE economy to a great degree. |

Foolish Bob
The Dirty Rotten Scoundrels In Tea We Trust
6
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 12:57:00 -
[492] - Quote
Quesa wrote:Foolish Bob wrote:It's bonuses. Please please stop saying that. Bonus is good person. Good thing would be bonum which as data is the plural noun to datum makes the plural bona but given it's all mangled (clearly) I think we're allowed to modernise in this case. Especially as I have to accept people using data as a singular noun despite having the opposite drilled into me, so you all get to accept that.  Also fun fact: the plural of octopus should be octopodes because the -pus part is greek. Not that I say anything other than octopi but I just like the fact  It's also the plural of Bonus although I'm not using the special character over the 'i' and you're right, the plural of octopus isn't octopi, it's octopodes but that is because it is, in fact, Greek and not Latin which traditionally swaps the -us for -i when plural. Additionally, it's a word I like.
so, like corporations, command ship / T3 bonuses are people too?  |

Miaaaw
SnaiLs aNd FroGs Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 13:02:00 -
[493] - Quote
I'm expecting my bonuses T3 that's worth three times a claymore on the market to give my fleet better bonuses, and I don't give a **** about having a bonus of each type. It seems you forgot about the ship prices, the better it is, the more you have to pay for it and this apply to all the changes planned in here.
Both nerfing Cane and Drake and buffing Myrm and harbinger isn't a good idea. It's the better way to make the old OP ones **** and the old ****** ones OP. Pick your changes but buffing is better than nerfing, I'm not the only one to say that.
Another point is that by nerfing missiles, you nerf other missiles boat such as Cerberus (which, in my opinion, doesn't diserve it) and not only the drake (that obviously diserve something in da face). And please, don't kill the ferox making it a railgun fragile sniping thing, no one will be using it.
Quote:Hyperion: the hull could be improved, but again most of the issues come from passive versus active tanking problems Yeah, **** passive tanking, let that to amar ships, they are good for fleets, Gallente ones are good for solo, no need to change this.
Each ship has its own weaknesses and strengths and that's what makes EVE insteresting, you have to keep that in mind before making them all the same. EVE isn't WoW, you're not bound to a race or a ship, you can fly whatever you want if you train for it, so there's no need for all ships to be equals. You can add to this the fact that the all market thing is rebalancing it for you. There's some good ideas in that blog but you should focus on making the ships that no one flies better instead of trying to balance ships that everyone loves the way they are.
You also have to think about changing the BP minerals requirements if you kill the Tier system, didn't hear anything about that.
Anyway I've got lots of things to say but it would take too long. Love you all anyway <3 |

Steven Shen
Raze Productions Li3 Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 13:07:00 -
[494] - Quote
Because of these changes, I have to re-arrange my training schedule which bring troubles to me, can u tell me the possible change time of the destroyer and bc skills? Jan, Late Jan or Feb? |

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
242
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 13:09:00 -
[495] - Quote
x (writing an insanely long post right here) |

Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
55
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 13:16:00 -
[496] - Quote
Steven Shen wrote:Because of these changes, I have to re-arrange my training schedule which bring troubles to me, can u tell me the possible change time of the destroyer and bc skills? Jan, Late Jan or Feb?
Would be good.
I appreciate you can't give firm go live date, but can you at least get something in the "not before" camp (that's further out than 5th Dec ) |

Abramul
StarFleet Enterprises Red Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 13:21:00 -
[497] - Quote
While on the subject of command ships, I would suggest using the T1 hull with a similar role for the base, instead of basing both on the same one. Mostly because I want a T2 Hurricane. |

Ponder Yonder
Broken Wheel Mercantile and Trading Company Illusion of Solitude
39
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 13:30:00 -
[498] - Quote
Great changes, CCP, and long overdue.
Do it now. Don't let the Drake / Tengu / Loki whiners stop you.
My 0.02 ISK: Whatever you do to the Brutix, please make it viable as fleet DPS boat that will not result in the pilot being kicked from fleet. Ditto for Gallente battleships, although it looks like you intend to do this for the Hyperion.
|

Don Salaris
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 13:31:00 -
[499] - Quote
I find the conversion of skills not very well explained. 'if you can fly it now, you can fly it afterwards' is only part of the story.
"Let us repeat again: if you could fly it before, you will be able to do so after the change. Technically it means if you are able to fly an Oracle by having Amarr Cruisers 3 and Battlecruisers 3, we will remove the Battlecruisers skill from your character and give you Amarr Battlecruisers at 3. If you had Battlecruisers at 3 and Caldari Cruisers 3 instead, you would not receive Amarr Battlecruisers but the Caldari Battlecruisers skill at 3 instead. The same principle work with the Destroyers skill."
What happens when you have a battlecruiser skill of level 5 and an Amarr cruiser skill of only 3? You get Amarr battlecruiser skill 3 according to the text. Just as someone who has only a battlecruiser skill of level 3. That seems hugely unfair. What happens with the effort invested in the 'extra' levels of battlecruiser skills that cannot get converted? Do you get the skillpoints back?
Now while I understand that the effort of the battlecruisers will be counted against all races and so you are getting a bonus when you have multiple races, starting toons have only 1 race developped I would say, and can have a loss of skill points as a result of this conversion.
Suppose I better start training races I have no interest in atm...
|

Creat Posudol
German Oldies
63
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 13:36:00 -
[500] - Quote
Don Salaris wrote:I find the conversion of skills not very well explained. 'if you can fly it now, you can fly it afterwards' is only part of the story.
"Let us repeat again: if you could fly it before, you will be able to do so after the change. Technically it means if you are able to fly an Oracle by having Amarr Cruisers 3 and Battlecruisers 3, we will remove the Battlecruisers skill from your character and give you Amarr Battlecruisers at 3. If you had Battlecruisers at 3 and Caldari Cruisers 3 instead, you would not receive Amarr Battlecruisers but the Caldari Battlecruisers skill at 3 instead. The same principle work with the Destroyers skill."
What happens when you have a battlecruiser skill of level 5 and an Amarr cruiser skill of only 3? You get Amarr battlecruiser skill 3 according to the text. Just as someone who has only a battlecruiser skill of level 3. That seems hugely unfair. What happens with the effort invested in the 'extra' levels of battlecruiser skills that cannot get converted? Do you get the skillpoints back?
Now while I understand that the effort of the battlecruisers will be counted against all races and so you are getting a bonus when you have multiple races, starting toons have only 1 race developped I would say, and can have a loss of skill points as a result of this conversion.
Suppose I better start training races I have no interest in atm... This has now been answered numerous times by the devs, if you had even just checked for dev posts in this thread you'd know it. It would've been faster than typing all the text you've posted. Quoted from just one page earlier:CCP Fozzie wrote:You'll be able to use the ships you could use before, at the same skill levels you could use them at before. So if you can fly Hurricanes with BC V, you'll get Minmatar BC V IN other words: having BCV will mean you'll get ANY racial BC at level 5 as long as you have that races Cruiser to at least III. |
|

Sivinn Da'Lawa
The Expatriot League
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 13:40:00 -
[501] - Quote
Don Salaris wrote:I find the conversion of skills not very well explained. 'if you can fly it now, you can fly it afterwards' is only part of the story.
"Let us repeat again: if you could fly it before, you will be able to do so after the change. Technically it means if you are able to fly an Oracle by having Amarr Cruisers 3 and Battlecruisers 3, we will remove the Battlecruisers skill from your character and give you Amarr Battlecruisers at 3. If you had Battlecruisers at 3 and Caldari Cruisers 3 instead, you would not receive Amarr Battlecruisers but the Caldari Battlecruisers skill at 3 instead. The same principle work with the Destroyers skill."
What happens when you have a battlecruiser skill of level 5 and an Amarr cruiser skill of only 3? You get Amarr battlecruiser skill 3 according to the text. Just as someone who has only a battlecruiser skill of level 3. That seems hugely unfair. What happens with the effort invested in the 'extra' levels of battlecruiser skills that cannot get converted? Do you get the skillpoints back?
Now while I understand that the effort of the battlecruisers will be counted against all races and so you are getting a bonus when you have multiple races, starting toons have only 1 race developped I would say, and can have a loss of skill points as a result of this conversion.
Suppose I better start training races I have no interest in atm...
First it does not say what you claim it does, it didn't address it at all, but was clarified by multiple dev comment already.
Their response was that you will be able to fly any ship at the existing level you did before, meaning Battlecruiser 5 combined with any Racial Cruiser 3 will result in Racial Battecruiser 5. |

Don Salaris
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 14:04:00 -
[502] - Quote
Creat Posudol wrote:This has now been answered numerous times by the devs, if you had even just checked for dev posts in this thread you'd know it. It would've been faster than typing all the text you've posted. Quoted from just one page earlier: CCP Fozzie wrote:You'll be able to use the ships you could use before, at the same skill levels you could use them at before. So if you can fly Hurricanes with BC V, you'll get Minmatar BC V IN other words: having BCV will mean you'll get ANY racial BC at level 5 as long as you have that races Cruiser to at least III.
Thank god for people who have the time to read 25 pages of text. 
I'm glad it will work as you describe...but frankly if someone makes a stupid text then I find that letting them clarify it multiple times is a good incentive to think twice next time about how to formulate things. |

Trash Ice
Black Sharks Division
7
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 14:06:00 -
[503] - Quote
I beg you not to f*ck with Typhoon. It is ok now, turrets are ok, everything is fine. Main feature of this BS is flexibiity. It feels like a cheap Machariel. Why should I like torpedoes? Do torpedoes have nice tracking and falloff? Can I kill frigate with it? If you want me to use torp-phoon, just give it some more cpu and armor and (voila!) - it will be great.
I have a feeling, that some changes are made just for changes themselves. |

Ethan Revenant
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
19
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 14:14:00 -
[504] - Quote
Making me want to fly an Eos while preaching against crosstraining is cruel.
Seriously, though, while I'm on the topic, a versatile noob is far more valuable than the noob who flies one T2 cruiser OMGSOWELL. If their focus is that narrow, they probably don't know what they're doing anyway. Crosstraining isn't the devil, and homogenizing the races to eliminate any perceived need to crosstrain would just be silly.
Because I am good at reading devblog, I only just noticed that the Harbinger will be losing a slot. No one else is crying internet tears over the Harbinger, so as it has served me well and faithfully, I have decided to rend garments and strew myself with ashes to make up for this. Further, [vader] NOOOOOOOOOOOO [/vader] |

Jame Jarl Retief
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
333
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 14:15:00 -
[505] - Quote
Quote:Dominix: still remains a popular ship. It is fairly good, except for the drone mechanics themselves, which are terribly outdated. While we are not certain when this can be tackled, it definitely has high priority on our to-do list.
That's great, but when? How can you balance a ship without knowing how drones will be fixed? Might as well leave it as it is, fix drones, and then re-balance all drone boats yet again to account for the drone changes.
Quote:Hyperion: the hull could be improved, but again most of the issues come from passive versus active tanking problems
Same as above, how can you balance the hull without knowing what the final solution will be to the whole tanking issue? Depending on how it's handled, the bonus on the hull could end up totally wrong, and powergrid/etc., could be way off, requiring a second rebalance which is coming who knows when.
Wouldn't it make much more sense to fix armor and drones FIRST, and then balance the ships using them? Instead of balancing the ships for existing (admittedly terribly outdated) state, then fixing the outdated stuff, and then being forced to re-balance yet again?
And PLEASE be careful with nerfing Megathron's hitpoints. Gallente have very few viable fleet ships as it is. If you turn a Mega into a close range blaster hull, you HAVE to do a good job on Hyperion, or do something magical about drones, to allow either Hype or Domi to be a good fleet ship.
And finally, why is Scorpion set into a separate category (EWAR), but other races get no EWAR hulls of battleship size? Grossly unbalanced, if you ask me, giving one race an EWAR BS, while others get absolutely nothing. Either give all races their own EWAR BS, or change Scorp into an Attack Battleship. Fair is fair. |

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
242
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 14:17:00 -
[506] - Quote
Sniping:
If CCP has ANY interest in making railguns and beams (not talking about Tachyons) usefull for pvp in a bigger scale I find it very important to double the alpha while keeping all other stats the same... This wont do everything but it will be a big step on the way. Currently artillery is the only way to go for real alpha... Rails and beams can be used, however it requires 3 times the amount of ships to pull off the same alpha as artillery with only marginal dps advantage which is still crap compared to short range weapon systems...
Pinky |

Creat Posudol
German Oldies
63
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 14:22:00 -
[507] - Quote
Don Salaris wrote:Thank god for people who have the time to read 25 pages of text.  I'm glad it will work as you describe...but frankly if someone makes a stupid text then I find that letting them clarify it multiple times is a good incentive to think twice next time about how to formulate things.
There is a very easy way to read just the dev posts in threads like this: Click on "Dev Posts" at the top, enter "Back to the balancing future" into the "Topic"-field and click search. You'll get a list of only the dev posts in this thread, and reading only those should be just fine since they usually quote the stuff they're responding to. Just open them all with middle click (or your browser equivalent for 'Open new tab in background') and voil+á.
I do agree that CCP should've added that information from the beginning to the blog, or at least after seeing it constantly asked even after it has been answered 4 times or so. If I recall correctly this was one of the most asked questions for the last blog where this subject was discussed, where they (or players who read all posts) also had to constantly answer it. So it was quite foreseeable that this would be a frequently asked question again.
CCP, just add it to the article, maybe in the form of CCP Fozzies line from a page or two back. That should do just fine. |

Irregessa
Obfuscation and Reflections
10
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 14:23:00 -
[508] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Sniping:
If CCP has ANY interest in making railguns and beams (not talking about Tachyons) usefull for pvp in a bigger scale I find it very important to double the alpha while keeping all other stats the same... This wont do everything but it will be a big step on the way. Currently artillery is the only way to go for real alpha... Rails and beams can be used, however it requires 3 times the amount of ships to pull off the same alpha as artillery with only marginal dps advantage which is still crap compared to short range weapon systems...
Pinky
Then you would need to scale back the cycle time on the beams and rails to compensate for the increased damage, at which point you are essentially making all three weapon systems largely the same (use of ammo and/or cap excepted).
If you want to do a lot of damage in one shot, you use arties. If you want to be able to do more continuous damage over time, you use beams. If you want something in the middle ground, you use rails. There is nothing substantial to be gained by making everything essentially the same. |

Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
497
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 14:28:00 -
[509] - Quote
Irregessa wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote:Sniping:
If CCP has ANY interest in making railguns and beams (not talking about Tachyons) usefull for pvp in a bigger scale I find it very important to double the alpha while keeping all other stats the same... This wont do everything but it will be a big step on the way. Currently artillery is the only way to go for real alpha... Rails and beams can be used, however it requires 3 times the amount of ships to pull off the same alpha as artillery with only marginal dps advantage which is still crap compared to short range weapon systems...
Pinky Then you would need to scale back the cycle time on the beams and rails to compensate for the increased damage, at which point you are essentially making all three weapon systems largely the same (use of ammo and/or cap excepted). If you want to do a lot of damage in one shot, you use arties. If you want to be able to do more continuous damage over time, you use beams. If you want something in the middle ground, you use rails. There is nothing substantial to be gained by making everything essentially the same.
Yup, exactly.
By "balancing", CCP mean make each class of ship across all the races, basically the same, they will just look different. There goes the diversity in EVE, which is what made this game unique. Welcome to WOW in space. |

Irregessa
Obfuscation and Reflections
11
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 14:30:00 -
[510] - Quote
Kara Vix wrote:Lady Naween wrote:As someone with all leadership skills to 5 all I can say is:
YAY!!!!!! thank you thank you thank you!!!
Offgrid boosting is so boring it isnt funny, and cant wait to be able to dps in my sexy damnation! ROAR!!!!! But unless that sexy ship gets some serious bonus to tank, you will be boosting for a very short time before it becomes a sexy wreck and you a sexy frozen corpse. I would think the first target priority will be the on grid booster and it wouldn't take much to dust it. Just my opinion.
Funny, I have flown claymores and damnations in large fleets and lived to park the ship back in the hangar at the end. Logis know to keep the command ships watchlisted, even permalocked, to make sure that they get reps when needed. My boosting pilot in his armor boosting clone (the one with the armor mindlink and full LG slave set) has a damnation with 630K EHP with the fleet bonuses/boni. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |