Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
James Lyrus
|
Posted - 2005.08.20 09:01:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Cannedbeef Edited by: Cannedbeef on 20/08/2005 04:50:33 Vaguelly less convenient?
I enjoy having a life. This makes me pick between a POS or it.
Think im going to switch to a system of Iteron V's parked inside the forcefield, all it does is make things harder and more annoying for NO reason.
Im not servicing my ******* POS every <28 hours. Allready have to empty Nanotransistors every <52, and that sucks. **** off CCP.
You're trying to fit a complex reaction and a simple on the same tower. With two towers, a medium and a large, you'd be able to do the same thing with much less effort.
|
Raivotar
|
Posted - 2005.08.20 10:15:00 -
[32]
Im little puzzled. CCP fixes obvious bug and there are people that start yelling that its nerf? I mean i dont get it. Also im amazed that people think POS should do everything automaticly without them being forced to reload/empty stuff.
Corporate hangar was bugged and CCP is fixing it. Thank you.
|
Cannedbeef
|
Posted - 2005.08.20 11:52:00 -
[33]
Originally by: James Lyrus
Originally by: Cannedbeef Edited by: Cannedbeef on 20/08/2005 04:50:33 Vaguelly less convenient?
I enjoy having a life. This makes me pick between a POS or it.
Think im going to switch to a system of Iteron V's parked inside the forcefield, all it does is make things harder and more annoying for NO reason.
Im not servicing my ******* POS every <28 hours. Allready have to empty Nanotransistors every <52, and that sucks. **** off CCP.
You're trying to fit a complex reaction and a simple on the same tower. With two towers, a medium and a large, you'd be able to do the same thing with much less effort.
Also would increase costs to 150%, raising cost per nanotransistor by 157, and when nanos are selling for 1400... Thats cutting the margin down to VERY little. All because a giant secure can (Corp Hangar) Needs to be onlined. I will be using parked Iteron V's and Secure Cans inside the forcefield from now on I think.. just means I will have to hit the station in system twice per silo every time I try to empty it or fill it (6 silo's). Thats a ridiculous amount of extra work, requiring an extra 12 docks/warps to POS.
|
Johnathan Roark
|
Posted - 2005.08.22 03:12:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Raivotar Edited by: Raivotar on 20/08/2005 10:58:39 Im little puzzled. CCP fixes obvious bug and there are people that start yelling that its nerf? I mean i dont get it. As this thread alone has showed that there are many many people exploiting this. Also im amazed that people think POS should do everything automaticly without them being forced to reload/empty stuff.
Corporate hangar was bugged and CCP is fixing it. Thank you.
There are other things in eve that have been arround since the begining that where considered bugs but are now standard practice, id be very suprized if you have not used some yourself. I will not mention them here for fear ccp will deside they need to be fixed after 2 years.
I think it would be resonable if CCP would reduce the fitting cost and raise the space they can hold.
Quantum Industries
|
James Lyrus
|
Posted - 2005.08.22 21:27:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Johnathan Roark
Originally by: Raivotar Edited by: Raivotar on 20/08/2005 10:58:39 Im little puzzled. CCP fixes obvious bug and there are people that start yelling that its nerf? I mean i dont get it. As this thread alone has showed that there are many many people exploiting this. Also im amazed that people think POS should do everything automaticly without them being forced to reload/empty stuff.
Corporate hangar was bugged and CCP is fixing it. Thank you.
There are other things in eve that have been arround since the begining that where considered bugs but are now standard practice, id be very suprized if you have not used some yourself. I will not mention them here for fear ccp will deside they need to be fixed after 2 years.
I think it would be resonable if CCP would reduce the fitting cost and raise the space they can hold.
It's a bug, but everyone exploits it, so it must be ok?
|
Tourix
|
Posted - 2005.08.23 11:13:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Tourix on 23/08/2005 11:13:20 Check Patch Note Build 3560 :
Quote: Player Owned Structures, Starbases and Outpost
[list=Corporate Hangar Array must be anchored and online to add items to its storage.][/list=Corporate Hangar Array must be anchored and online to add items to its storage.]
|
Stepping Razor
|
Posted - 2005.08.23 16:41:00 -
[37]
They needed to be fixed, but the need for CPU should be removed. It's already impossible to fit one on an Amarr L CT while it's doing a complex reaction, and the Amarr M tower OFC is the only racial tower that can't even run a simple without depending on coupling arrays.
Just make it demand a decent ammount of grid. That'll stop people from stacking 20 of them at their POS.
Razor
Originally by: Bonaventure Phaidon CCP is the best at at least three things: 1. Really, really fun gameplay 2. Good forum presence 3. Inventing new and exciting ways to bring about in-game catacly |
Effei Gloom
|
Posted - 2005.08.23 22:16:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Effei Gloom on 23/08/2005 22:17:36
Does CCP really want us to have 20-30 giant conti floating inside FF to have ammu supply so long corp hangars are offline?
CEO of FAEX - currently inviting non-pirate-corporations to 0.0 - |
Drake Doon
|
Posted - 2005.08.23 23:12:00 -
[39]
Wow! Good discussion.
It seems they did try to address it in the recent patch - but missed by that much (any Get Smart fans out there?).
Think I'll play it safe for now and online the damn thing.
|
Grash Freedom
|
Posted - 2005.10.29 06:20:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Grash Freedom on 29/10/2005 06:22:43
Originally by: Cannedbeef then how do you run twin reactors? as is is now you have to use caldari...
Harvester -\ Silo --- Reactor1
Reactor 1--\ Silo --\ Silo --\ Silo ---- Reactor 2 -- Silo
1 Harvester: 500 cpu 5 Silos: 2500 cpu Reactors 4500 cpu
works out to 7500 cpu even. Cant fit any EW or anything. corp hangar array MUST be offline.
Well i have drawn for you a better chart
harvester -\ C.Array--C.Array ---Reactor1
Reactor1 -\ C.Array--C.Array -\ C.Array--C.Array -\ C.Array--C.Array ---Reactor2---Silo--Silo
A) 8*C.Arrays+2Silo 2240 2*Reactors 4500 Moon Harvester 500 Corporate Hangar +155 =7395
or B) 8*C.Arrays+1*Silo 1740 2*Reactors 4500 Moon Harvester 500 2*Corporate Hangar +310 =7050
and you have cpu for ew and missiles
you can have 1 corporate hangars 200000m3 space without exploiting any bug and you have more space for the nanos,restock every 2 days i suggest this chart because anyways you have to empty the last silo every day with your chart
so now with my suggestion all you have to do is go there every 2 days
i hope it's correct :)
|
|
Baldour Ngarr
|
Posted - 2005.10.29 07:47:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Cannedbeef Allready have to empty Nanotransistors every <52, and that sucks.
That's your fault, not CCP's. Come up with a better production line. In any event, you don't *HAVE* to do anything in EVE. You don't like running a POS, go do something else. Just quit whining and swearing about it here.
Celt Corp - members of ISS |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |