| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Troezar
   |
Posted - 2005.10.06 17:15:00 -
[31]
How about giving bonuses for mixed (ship types) gangs and/or penalties for say all BS gangs?
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.10.06 19:21:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Lifewire
I just read Oveurs new blog. I like much that something is done about the fact that combats are often too short. It¦s often very anoying if you fitted and travelled 1 hour to finally have a 10 second battle. So generally i think CCPs idea to get ships more hitpoints is a good idea.
But i also see problems: more hitpoints means that more ships will survive when shot at.
Sorry, wrong initial assumption.
More hp == more gank setups, and more ganking.
Remember that 2 damage mods will do MORE damage, which helps a lot of cruisers, frex (And the Rail tarranis I fly). If the enemy is tougher, you'll want to do more damage. People will fly ships with greater sustained damage. (I expect usage of Minmatar ships to fall).
Forcast indicates more camping is expected.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
Lifewire
|
Posted - 2005.10.06 19:40:00 -
[33]
Whatever opinion you have about the change - you can be sure it is a major change! If tanks get boosted so much there will be situations very often where enemys cannot destroy each others ships.
These new tanks also dont need instas anymore: nobody (unless 5+ battleships) will be able to destroy a mwd-hac before it can jump after 15 km to the gate.
As pirate i know that change will change warfare a lot, ship kills will be reduced and blobbing will once more be the only answer to adapt. Killer-teams will simply need more firepower. This is a fact.
Try a Teddybear spawn or the Teddybear complexes in Pure Blind, Syndicate or empire. |
Jason Kildaro
|
Posted - 2005.10.06 20:05:00 -
[34]
Quote:
Whatever opinion you have about the change - you can be sure it is a major change! If tanks get boosted so much there will be situations very often where enemys cannot destroy each others ships.
Maybe that is the problem? Take out invunerability fields and the "boost all resistance" setups. Make it so that you can't tank EVERYTHING but only one thing extremely well. This makes ammo choice more of a factor and may force fleet commanders to split thier firepower...placing the RIGHT firepower where it is needed.
|
Mangold
|
Posted - 2005.10.06 21:37:00 -
[35]
I'm with Lifewire on this one.
Small hit groups wont be possible anymore.
|
Xune
|
Posted - 2005.10.06 21:50:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Lifewire
I just read Oveurs new blog. I like much that something is done about the fact that combats are often too short. It¦s often very anoying if you fitted and travelled 1 hour to finally have a 10 second battle. So generally i think CCPs idea to get ships more hitpoints is a good idea.
But i also see problems: more hitpoints means that more ships will survive when shot at. It makes it again more nessesairy to fight with many versus a single to get loot. So it supports ganking. So many good effects CCPs new plan has - it also has a lot of negative consequences for the game.
I think the direction is ok: make combat more exiting and lasting longer. But the consequences have not to be ignored:
-> more killers needed to nail a person, so more ganking
-> less ships destroyed, less profit for PVPers and marketsellers.
-> less ships destroyed, less losses for certain players that loose their moneysink
What will compensate this effects?
I thought a lot about why combats in EVE often are stupid: when 10 ships shoot at 1 it simply instapops. That¦s not big fun. Instead of changing the hitpoints it could be wise to nerf "fleetvolleys". This means: once a target is shot at, it starts to be hidden in smoke and explosions and signature radius drops. This would be a good way to nerf "blobbing" and fights 10 vs 1.
We all know that a lot of combats never happen because all players fear the conseuquences to fight outnumbered. Eve would gain additional fun if the numbers of players on both involved groups do not count that much anymore. The gangsize should have some negative effects. And the more ships fire on one ship, the more the "damage stacking" should be nerfed to improve gameplay.
Some people might not understand. Lets take a closer look at a 10 vs 20 battle:
Team 1:
1 EW Scorp
8 gunships
1 tackle-ceptor
Team 2:
2 EW Scorp
16 gunships
2 tackle-ceptors
On a open fleet battle it is 100% sure that team 2 will win. The firepower of 16 gunships in 2 fireteams will make team 2 pop 2 enemy gunships while team 1 only pops one enemy gunship in the same time. The effect is so big, that nobody (except some crazy people) would start a 10 vs 20 on a open fleetbattle. Don¦t get me wrong: it¦s possible to fight 10 vs 20, but an open battle without sneaky tactics is not winnable for team 1 if team 2 has at least some experience. The whole coordination in the battle is reduced to "naming targets" and if all involved players shoot at these targets, team 2 will win.
The "damage-stacking" nerf of fleet volleys would cause that a group of 10 players might try to fight a group of 20. If for example the signature radius of a ship looses a certain amount for each ship that shoots at it, then totally new and nice tactics will appear in group fights. It wont make sence anymore to concentrate fire that much like all EVE players do it right now. Concentration of fire will still cause a target to die quick, but splitting fire in2, maybe 5 or even 10 could also be an option once "damage-stacking" of fleet volleys get a penalty.
However - my idea does still not solve the problem that i named when i began my post: what will compensate the changes that happen when less ships will be destroyed.
To be discussed.
honestly ?
i love that idear... even if life hate me and i dont like him ^^ he often bring realy good idear¦s up
|
Deka Kador
|
Posted - 2005.10.06 21:52:00 -
[37]
More hitpoints = less kills....for snipers.
|
Cmdr Sp0ck
|
Posted - 2005.10.06 22:42:00 -
[38]
I like the idea. Making the BS harder to kill can certainly increase battle times. Don't think it will necessarily decrease overall losses in game. Or rather, the decrease wont be too drastic?
Dunno really. At the very least im up for longer battles.
|
Tenacha Khan
|
Posted - 2005.10.06 23:22:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Cmdr Sp0ck
I like the idea. Making the BS harder to kill can certainly increase battle times. Don't think it will necessarily decrease overall losses in game. Or rather, the decrease wont be too drastic?
Dunno really. At the very least im up for longer battles.
I like lifewires sugestion, it would need to be messed about with so that it doesnt outcast low sp players, on the otherhand I dont feel that fleet battles will last longer with the boost to dmg mod stacking and hp.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 00:56:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Cmdr Sp0ck
I like the idea. Making the BS harder to kill can certainly increase battle times. Don't think it will necessarily decrease overall losses in game. Or rather, the decrease wont be too drastic?
Dunno really. At the very least im up for longer battles.
Don't kid yourself.
The limiting factors on fleet battles are:
Tackling ships moving into range
Capacitor capacity
Reinforcements
NOT generally (except target callers)
How quickly anyone dies.
Fleet battles are unlikely to last that much longer. Less deaths.
But, tbh, I don't really care about that. My focus is smaller engagements, which will be more drastically affected...
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
Corvus Anderran
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 01:27:00 -
[41]
Forgive me if I've understood this wrong, but I can't see why there would suddenly be situations of 2 ships unable to break each other's tanks? The only two benefits an active tank setup has after these changes are stacking penalty changes making double hardeners more effective and 25% extra HP. They get better resists with the hardeners off than they did before but that's mostly irrelevant. And the 25% extra HP only serves to prevent a barrage of 1400s stripping your armor each salvo and doing a little structure damage. A decrease in refire rate of artillery but with a damage increase to maintain the DPS will result in things being pretty much the same, since the repair rate of the best tanks hasn't changed. Right?
|
OffBeaT
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 01:50:00 -
[42]
yea, i for one dont fight too much in this game anymore becouse of the way they are gearing up combat mostly for fleet battles & ******* it up for the solo/smal corp hunters now. i dont realy have a strong vertile solo combat ship anymore or not since the raven/missile/jamming nerfs anyway, for the job of solo hunting that is. so now its just come down too pulling up too a corp and calling somone out too fight. since most dont fight solo i just end up leaving pised off that even with days or weeks of tracking somone for there crimes aginst me or others i proble unless they won't too fight can't catch them aswell as i could in the past without more abilitys that the ships could do in the past. never mined ****en beefing up the armor of the ships, just give us some mods that stop other ships from group locking too you. damps use too work great for that, as a solo hunter i could load up 6 damps and throw 2 on each ship too stay alive out numberd long enough too maybe get at that player i wont. i could stop frigs from worp jaming me and keep them at bay out of range while i sluged it out with the BS. i cant do this kind of attacks anymore. i cant trust my damps or my jamming gear. so f all that kind of fun i use too have. i WONT ships that are for solo speclized players like me who like too spend weeks tracking criminals then needing the ability too use my ship in very versitaile ways with some real firepower. i mean most players in this game dont wont too be bounty hunters anymore becouse they are always out numberd now & the ships just flat out suck for the jobs. lets bring back the law men in the game with ships that are geard for the solo hunters. i should not need 10 players just too hunt one guy. i wont ships for solo players who have highend skills too use them. they should have many mid/low slots or more then the normal types of ships anyway.
|
Ticondrius
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 01:50:00 -
[43]
First..I'm generally in support of CCP's move. I just ask that they throughly test the HP increase, as well as the mass increases for plates.
Second..the original poster had this idea that got me thinking about the massed fire problem. Originally, massed fire made fleet battles possible in the early days, as insta-ganking and uberhigh dps wasn't really that possible. Without massed fire, losses on both sides would get near 50% or so before one side or the other would breakoff, meaning a HUGE loss of power for the fleets involved. Remember, back then to have 100m average wallet was an extreme luxury back then.
I like the idea of a reduced signature, but I think I might have a better idea. What if a gang had a limited number of pilots that could target the same ship? You'd have to have and use multiple gangs to get the same massed fire effect you do now, forcing large fleets to divide their firepower to like 3-5 ships per target. This would nearly eliminate the small ganksquads everyone loves to hate, and encourage tactical thinking in large fleet engagements.
Rather than going by the thinking of "Blob A" vs "Blob B", you'd break it down into ship class combat and small unit tactics. You'd get frigs weaving in and out around the enemy battleships hunting down other frigs and light cruisers. You'd see cruisers trying to augment a battleship's firepower, and 2-3 battleships tearing other battleships to shreds. You might even *GASP* create a restricted access fleet channel for the entire formation, and build the fleet into operation gangs! OMG! The possibility for fleet flexibility are massive!
In order to "sell" the idea of a maximum number of ships able to target a single ship CCP could Make it a new gang support skill/module system named along the theme of massed fire. Imagine the first skill allowing the gang to have up to 5 ships on a single target, then the advanced to give increased tracking to a target that has 2 or more gang members targetting it, then maybe a command module that grants a bonus to lock speed for a target that at least 1 gang member already has locked?
|
slip66
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 03:06:00 -
[44]
I dont think there is anything wrong with adding HP and increasing the takning ability of ships. The battles need to be longer like they used to be. They went for a hour plus at times and people still died.
I dont think we should be able to reduce sig radius to crazy levels only a small amount.
I welcome a stacking nerf. I dont want to see any kind of diminishing returns for focused fire unless it's only possible thru the use of gang assist modules.
|
slip66
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 03:07:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Deka Kador
More hitpoints = less kills....for snipers.
whats wrong with that? there is very little risk involved for snipers. You should have to trade up dmg for the safety of that range.
|
Jak'ai
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 03:15:00 -
[46]
TBH - I see where the motivation comes from, but these changes seem to be far too heavily weighted to defence. Increase HP, increases in resistances and decreases in damage all in one go is a bit much.
The problem with making combat longer is that it (further) promotes combat by spreadsheet. Damage per second is what matters, which will likely shaft the ships/weapons that rely on front-loaded or volley damage.
I think some other system needs to be implemented to keep volley damage relevant. Maybe something like: all weapons get a chance at getting a "penetrating" hit (projectiles and missiles higher chance, then hybrids and lasers). Penetrating hits would damage a random module, destroying it if damage is high enough. Damage controls could do what they were supposed to do originally (add HP to modules). Matari and Caldari ships would be more appealing to those that like to take chances. Short range guns vs long range guns balance out as short range get more chances at module hits, but can't destroy a module in one hit. Long range guns have fewer chances, but would probably destroy modules (assuming weapon sizes are equal).
Anything to prevent "Dude - what's your DPS?" from becoming even more prevalent.
|
Captin Biltmore
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 04:12:00 -
[47]
Wasn't it Churchill that said, "Peace through superior firepower", or was it Patten. Oh well, superior numbers IS a part of PVP...and any fighting anywhere (except for amarr vs. jove for some odd reason).
Assasin For Hire - Contact in game |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 05:01:00 -
[48]
The whole purpose of nerfing gank setups and such is not to make it so people SURVIVE people so much as make it so that the guy having the gank setup doesn't win 100% of the time.
When you have all these new advanced weapon skills, tech II weapons, tech II dmg mods, ect it makes it very easy to make insanely high DPS ships, so what good are defensive ships, or electronic warfare, ect.
They're not trying to nerf the ability to kill each other, but what kind of viable setups can change the outcome of a fight. Right now it's GANK4TW. 
------
|
Megadon
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 06:34:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Megadon on 07/10/2005 06:35:59
Originally by: Lifewire
The DEVs want to do the correct thing: make combat longer. But the actual name-primary-target-secondary-target-and all-shoot is not very exiting PVP. The possible doubling of hitpoints (was also planned) just forces to concentrate fire even more! I also forces to have more people in a successfull camp. It also forces to have more pirates when surprising someone in a belt, because a single pirate wont have the firepower to take out these new tanks that will be fitted soon.
I see only the solution to attack the problems from another direction: not boosting hitpoints, but nerfing fleetvolleys which has sligtly different effects, but offer much more tactics in group combat and does not change to 1 vs 1 balance that seems to be quite good after all the patching.
However changing hitpoints and resistances will have massive effects on EVE. Don¦t think it¦s a minor patch. It will change warfare totally to extreme blobbing while my proposed solution changes it to less blobbing.
Your suggested solution is worse than the problem. Your trying to cure brain cancer by putting a gun to your head and pulling the trigger.
I agree with the intent of what you are trying to achieve and I think it would make the game more interesting. But so far, none of the solutions discussed here make any sense.
Doing something like nerfing fleet vollies is not acceptable, because it flies in the face of so many other elements of the game mechanics. Like gang warfare link modules for example.
There are two seperate issues. The individual combat pilot is going to have more of a challenge then before and it is evenly balanced on both sides, so i don't see a problem. The outrageous damage output ship fitting, will now have a tougher time quickly killing a target. The overall drive is to encourage more teamplay and it is successful at this.
The blobbing issues i don't think is in response to any particular mechanic of the game, its just a simple fact that more ships is better than fewer ships. It's this way in any multiplayer game. More is better whether you're playing Eve or Quake 3. To addresss this, CCP is forcing mixed fleets and bringing a lot of other elements to bear in this equation such as warfare link mods, increased tanking ability, strengthening smaller ships, making logistics more viable for support, tweaking weapons and damage output and dreadnoughts. I think that over time, the intended effect will be longer engagements and more strategy than just calling primary and secondary targets. But I think the changes will occur slowly over time as the playerbase learns how to best use these resources to their full effect and i dont think that's happened yet or even begun. Consequently, I don't think something as intrusive as you suggest is needed. There are a lot of changes happening and i think it is too soon to judge what the long term effect is going to be.
|
Lifewire
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 10:32:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Lifewire on 07/10/2005 10:35:30
Try to see it from a pirate corp view:
more hitpoints makes us need more firepower to kill someone at a snipe- or tankcamp and also makes us need more firepower when we attack someone in a belt. So we need MORE ships to do our work. The effect will be that we need 10 instead of 7 camper ships. Where is the improvement? The result is still the same: 1 guy gets ganked.
Try to see it from an alliance fleet pilots view:
more hitpoints make it more than ever nessesairy to concentrate fire on 1 target in fleet battles. So the not very good PVP in EVE would be even more simplyfied to "name-target-all-fire". Don¦t think that this stuff is tactic - this is absilutly simplyfied combat to have 1 leader that calls 1 target after the other. So i also don¦t see the improvement for fleet battles.
Nerfing fleet volleys do improve all kind of battles, because a fleet will need "subleaders" and each pilot will have to do his own dicissions. A fleetbattle will be splitted into several smaller battles were at one egde of the battle some pilots fight "their targets" and on the other edge of the battle 40 km away they figth completly different targets. This is a very interesting PVP upgrade if the simplyfied "all-shot-at-one-target" leaves this way.
It does not make numbers useless! But it helps the smaller group. So more battles will happen because smaller groups wont sefespot so often, they will more often try if they are for example only outnumbered 13:10 or 7:5.
Nerfing blobwarfare is anyway a good thing. Even people that use blobwarfare know very well that blobwarfare is 99% boring and the few combat that happens is totally lagged then. Not very exiting.
Try a Teddybear spawn or the Teddybear complexes in Pure Blind, Syndicate or empire. |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 10:46:00 -
[51]
Nah, more hp's also means more time to employ your EW, to make speed or close range, to have staggered warpins ...
to employ tactics.
Sorry, but if this change nerfs sniping camps you won't see me crying about it. Sniping camps need a hell of a nerf anyway.
It's effect on tankcamps is relative. You need to do damage longer and thus need more staying power. More hp's and better resists = more staying power.
However, I would hate to see tanking camps nerfed by this, so I agree a good look at smaller scale combat and tank balance is needed. But tbh, I think thats exactly what they're going to do.
As far as the rest goes. Fighting outnumbered depends on superior tactics, not superior firepower. More time means more chance to use those tactics, as well as needing them to be better if they are to let your survive an encounter with a larger gang.
All in all, 1v1 is just a small and insignificant part of Eve combat. Small gang warfare is the largest by far, and fleetbattles are again a small part (but one often looked forward to most for some reason).
They all need their balance, but to stop a change because it could affect 1v1's negatively ?
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Lifewire
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 11:03:00 -
[52]
It doesnt nerf sinping camps much. It will only need an additional sniper for cruisers and battleships. I don¦t feel nerved with this patch too much. The better tanking will make it possible to camp close at the gate much better.
But the main effect is that MORE ships are needed to sink one ship. This cannot be good, it will cause larger camps, more blobbing and additional boredome. What is needed is a solution that improves combat. My solution improves combat:
Battles like we know em:
A fleetcomander names the targets and all gunship-pilots do shoot this target. Simplyfied combat so even totally stupid people can be usefull.
Battles with fleetvolly nerf:
Concentrating fire will still be usefull, but when concentrated on one target too much it will have a negative effect (fleet is loosing DPS). So each pilot has to make decissions too, not only a fleetcommander. Every single pilot needs to think himself what target it could be wise to shoot at right in this moment. If he sees and enemy BS already under heavy fire he should pick his own targets. This makes PVP more interesting. It also helps the smaller teams and nerfes blobs wich is a good thing. We all know that blobwarfare is often very boring. Forcing players into gangsizes between 5-15 is a good way to solve all these blobbing problems. It simply wont be usefull to be in a blob anymore and so the most stupid warfare option that EVE has, the blobbing, will disapear slowly.
Try a Teddybear spawn or the Teddybear complexes in Pure Blind, Syndicate or empire. |
Agnar Koladrov
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 11:08:00 -
[53]
An overall HP increase will make tech 1 cruiser more survivable then they are now in PvP, discounting overplated setups. Even frigs will bennefit from an hp increase, but I have my doubts with what this would do with bs`s vc anything lower (discounting tec2 ships)
|
Lord WarATron
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 11:13:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Lord WarATron on 07/10/2005 11:13:38
Again, everyone assumes a one sided stance about this extra 25% hitpoints.
Firstly, I assume it means 25% to everything and not just structure
Secondly, it will put in place a possibility of players be strong enough to tank the next gen lvl5 agents, to which I assume a HAC could not even tank. It will also means more people will enter 10/10 complexes etc.
Thirdly, the next gen T3 equipment is going to pop BS's like BS's pop Frigs today.
Finally, if they made it 25% longer to start warp in addition to the extra 25% hp's, that would be very intresting.
The whole point is to have a system in place that will allow support for future updates.
|
Redblade
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 11:37:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Lifewire
But the main effect is that MORE ships are needed to sink one ship. This cannot be good, it will cause larger camps, more blobbing and additional boredome.
That is a problem with the sentry/agro system more then the hp increase.
Originally by: Lifewire
Battles with fleetvolly nerf:
Concentrating fire will still be usefull, but when concentrated on one target too much it will have a negative effect (fleet is loosing DPS). So each pilot has to make decissions too, not only a fleetcommander. Every single pilot needs to think himself what target it could be wise to shoot at right in this moment. If he sees and enemy BS already under heavy fire he should pick his own targets. This makes PVP more interesting. It also helps the smaller teams and nerfes blobs wich is a good thing. We all know that blobwarfare is often very boring. Forcing players into gangsizes between 5-15 is a good way to solve all these blobbing problems. It simply wont be usefull to be in a blob anymore and so the most stupid warfare option that EVE has, the blobbing, will disapear slowly.
And who are u to decide that 5-15 man gangs shuld be the norm?
As for the single member needing to chose what to shoot in a fleet, it will make leadership harder and add alot of chaos to the gangs and possibly resulting in people getting killed just because of it and in the long run make people not wanting to go on fleet ops.
Your idea isn't a way to improve battle, it's a nerf to combat in general as it will give leaders headakes about how many to bring and how to set up gangs and such wich will lead to less people wanting to do it hence less combat gangs because noone can be arsed to make it happen.
Killboard |
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 11:41:00 -
[56]
Actually tactics are only somthing that really works in small battles where it's possible to co-ordinate everyone rapidly.
In larger fights tactics go out the window and it mostly comes down to firepower, no amount of changes will really alter this, its just the nature of those engagements.
Persoanlly I think the more health points will be a good thing now, tank setups are becoming somthing used only in npcing while gank setups tend to be foremost in peoples mind in pvp. These changes don't make it harder to kill anyone, it just means it takes longer.
|
James Lyrus
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 11:57:00 -
[57]
In my limited experience of PvP, I have to say, the fights are over just too fast.
I have no trouble with the idea that you'll need more ships to instantly gank things. IMO 'instantly ganking' things is one of the things that makes PvPing _less_ fun, for all parties.
I can see more people entering PvP if their experience of it isn't '*blam* in yer pod'.
Investment Opportunity:
|
Lifewire
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 12:14:00 -
[58]
With my not limited PVP experience...i have to say that more hitpoints will not change that some unlucky guys that were named as targets will go instapop. It just will need more firepower and i guess in fleetbattles there is enough firepower to instapop any shipclass. So only a nerf of fleetvolleys will change this not very exiting combat experience of beeing the named target. If well balanced, the fleets are forced to split their fire. Some say here it will cause chaos - chaos is good! War is chaos and the people that can handle chaos are good in combat. 1 leader in both teams naming one target is not chaos - it¦s simplyfied combat. It¦s like drawing a frame on all your "command and conquer" units and sent let them fire on one enemy unit...simplyfied crap.
Try a Teddybear spawn or the Teddybear complexes in Pure Blind, Syndicate or empire. |
Deka Kador
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 15:20:00 -
[59]
Originally by: slip66
Originally by: Deka Kador
More hitpoints = less kills....for snipers.
whats wrong with that? there is very little risk involved for snipers. You should have to trade up dmg for the safety of that range.
Ding! Gratz!
That's where I was coming from...hopefully this will be the final nail in the coffin for snipers.
|
Lifewire
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 16:55:00 -
[60]
Quote:
That's where I was coming from...hopefully this will be the final nail in the coffin for snipers
If this is why you like it, then let me say that for example our sniperteam will just be bigger, while our tankerteam could tanl sentrys much better. Don¦t do the mistake to just think about that ships get harder to kill - also think about what will be the consequence: more killers needed -> more blobbing or even more snipers (that will be able to tank quite good then!). Lately Myal and Chode were sniping a gate with 2 sniper-fitted BS. 2 Enyos warped on top of them and destroyed Chodes BS. With the new tanking such a cool tactic will not work anymore...
BTW: your statement shows that you dont understand warfare. I recommend you join the Teddybear Acadamy of advanced pirate studies to boost your knowledge 
Try a Teddybear spawn or the Teddybear complexes in Pure Blind, Syndicate or empire. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |