Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 [70] 80 .. 89 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 23 post(s) |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
129
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 09:43:00 -
[2071] - Quote
Akturous wrote:Seriously Fozzie, cargo hold on the deimos, 315 on an active tanker? That's 11 cap boosters if you want minimal ammo, seriously mate, cargo holds on all these ships are way over the shop, cmd ships as well. Some space please.
I thought this too - until I flew the ship.
It has a very strong capacitor and can almost perma-run 1 repper on cap recharge alone. I assure you I have been running out of ammo before cap boosters.
|
Devon Weeks
Deadspace Defense Initiative Initiative Associates
35
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 09:44:00 -
[2072] - Quote
Akturous wrote:Seriously Fozzie, cargo hold on the deimos, 315 on an active tanker? That's 11 cap boosters if you want minimal ammo, seriously mate, cargo holds on all these ships are way over the shop, cmd ships as well. Some space please.
Whah? Are you using navy 400s? That's really all you need, and I am able to fit 21 of them easily with plenty of room left for nanite paste and ammo. |
galessin
Fumble et Black Cat
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 10:22:00 -
[2073] - Quote
ishtar has 3 useables bonus at the same time, all others HAC have 4.... something seems to be wrong... |
MJ Incognito
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
17
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 10:22:00 -
[2074] - Quote
Devon Weeks wrote:
Your idea of, essentially, a "command" style module that will provide a buff like a boosting module would certainly be unique and isn't a bad one in my view, but what will those effects be? Command ships and tech 3s already boost armor, speed/agility, e-war, and shields. How do you boost defensive capability without overlapping your role with the Damnation? The idea needs some fleshing out, but it isn't a bad line of thought.
You just create a module that has an active and passive effect that determines where your ship shines and falls.... you could actually do multiple varieties.
For instance:
Active: Boost AB speed 75%, Boost resistances 50%, boost local armor/shield repair speed 25% --- But, Reduces Optimal 75%, Reduces tracking 75%, reduces remote repair assistance, Increases Cap Injector duration by 300% (IE slowing down cap injector rates) in total for minute duration
Passive: NO pros, no cons....
So you question yourself... do I need that approach speed if it's going to totally force me to rely on my own repairers and capacitor... or are my logistics ships all jammed and I need to boost my local defenses thinking we can't get them unjammed...and **** I'm stuck if they get unjammed, and I get webbed down to **** and neuted. |
S1dy
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
20
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 10:25:00 -
[2075] - Quote
Devon Weeks wrote:
Personal insults aside, your post seems a bit unrealistic. Also, your assertion that I haven't noticed all the Deimos proposals in this thread is wrong. But, no one has suggested what you have. It's all been more speed, lower sig, etc. It's just stat changes, nothing more.
Your idea of, essentially, a "command" style module that will provide a buff like a boosting module would certainly be unique and isn't a bad one in my view, but what will those effects be? Command ships and tech 3s already boost armor, speed/agility, e-war, and shields. How do you boost defensive capability without overlapping your role with the Damnation? The idea needs some fleshing out, but it isn't a bad line of thought.
It's just an example. His goal is to determine a specific role, a specialization and that's what I want for HAC's as well. It's a Tech 2 ship that should have a specialization for anything (even CCP stated that a few times in the past). In both threads to the HAC changes are so many examples for what it could be that would make the HAC's special and worth it to use (or buy). Some stated Large Micro Jump Drives, bonus to Target Spectrum Breaker, etc etc. There are enough examples. some are bad, some are good. But the Role Bonus right now is crap and even the bad examples are far better than the MWD Bonus.
|
Devon Weeks
Deadspace Defense Initiative Initiative Associates
35
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 10:30:00 -
[2076] - Quote
Quote:You just create a module that has an active and passive effect that determines where your ship shines and falls.... you could actually do multiple varieties.
For instance:
Active: Boost AB speed 75%, Boost resistances 50%, boost local armor/shield repair speed 25% --- But, Reduces Optimal 75%, Reduces tracking 75%, reduces remote repair assistance, Increases Cap Injector duration by 300% (IE slowing down cap injector rates) in total for minute duration
Passive: NO pros, no cons....
So you question yourself... do I need that approach speed if it's going to totally force me to rely on my own repairers and capacitor... or are my logistics ships all jammed and I need to boost my local defenses thinking we can't get them unjammed...and **** I'm stuck if they get unjammed, and I get webbed down to **** and neuted.
Not bad. A coding nightmare, but that's not our problem. Lol. I basically understand your idea as beign portable "wormhole system style effects" packed in a module. I could see something like that being a fun addition, even if it does provide a rather tedious level of micromanagement for fleet commanders. |
MJ Incognito
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
17
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 10:32:00 -
[2077] - Quote
Devon Weeks wrote:Quote:You just create a module that has an active and passive effect that determines where your ship shines and falls.... you could actually do multiple varieties.
For instance:
Active: Boost AB speed 75%, Boost resistances 50%, boost local armor/shield repair speed 25% --- But, Reduces Optimal 75%, Reduces tracking 75%, reduces remote repair assistance, Increases Cap Injector duration by 300% (IE slowing down cap injector rates) in total for minute duration
Passive: NO pros, no cons....
So you question yourself... do I need that approach speed if it's going to totally force me to rely on my own repairers and capacitor... or are my logistics ships all jammed and I need to boost my local defenses thinking we can't get them unjammed...and **** I'm stuck if they get unjammed, and I get webbed down to **** and neuted. Not bad. A coding nightmare, but that's not our problem. Lol. I basically understand your idea as beign portable "wormhole system style effects" packed in a module. I could see something like that being a fun addition, even if it does provide a rather tedious level of micromanagement for fleet commanders.
That's more of a local pilot decision than an FC decision... that's the point..... the FC would never micromanage on that level just as any HIC pilot already knows. It's not a coding nightmare either... We already have modules that do all those sorts of things... It's just combining effects into one module.... |
Danny John-Peter
Stay Frosty.
288
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 10:45:00 -
[2078] - Quote
MJ Incognito wrote:Danny John-Peter wrote: Modules dedicated to 1 class of ship are generally pretty crap as they limit fitting choices.
To be honest, the HACs generally look in a good place at this point, the Eagle maybe needs a little more speed but I really think we need to see that one on TQ before we can say for sure, the Vaga needs a second falloff bonus to be a viable kiter, apart from that things are looking Ok.
OK compared to what? I'm sorry, but define what these ships do in game that's not already being done 50 times over by other ships, and almost always better and cheaper? A module dedicated to 1 ship in 1 slot to affect a role has no real impact on fitting choices... especially when you can give a bonus slot to every ship for that specific module. This is exactly my point... you guys think they're ok b/c they look better on a forum post and on a horrific simulation test server... you don't have a clue what's going to happen live when the meta game hits. Meta game creates winners and losers. Hacs have been loser for so long b/c they have no real purpose.... and how do you think any of these changes affect a purpose? They don't... they just make **** ships slightly less ****** than before. You can put a flower on a turd and make it smell better, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a turd.
You really just proved my point, the balancing is almost at a good point now, Im still not happy about the Vaga but Im pretty much resigned to the fact that CCP don't want their to be a good kiting Minmatar HAC because then idiots who don't know how to counter such things would whine.
We need to see these changes on TQ and take it from their, see how the meta changes and balance pass as it goes along. |
MJ Incognito
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
17
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 10:50:00 -
[2079] - Quote
Danny John-Peter wrote:MJ Incognito wrote:Danny John-Peter wrote: Modules dedicated to 1 class of ship are generally pretty crap as they limit fitting choices.
To be honest, the HACs generally look in a good place at this point, the Eagle maybe needs a little more speed but I really think we need to see that one on TQ before we can say for sure, the Vaga needs a second falloff bonus to be a viable kiter, apart from that things are looking Ok.
OK compared to what? I'm sorry, but define what these ships do in game that's not already being done 50 times over by other ships, and almost always better and cheaper? A module dedicated to 1 ship in 1 slot to affect a role has no real impact on fitting choices... especially when you can give a bonus slot to every ship for that specific module. This is exactly my point... you guys think they're ok b/c they look better on a forum post and on a horrific simulation test server... you don't have a clue what's going to happen live when the meta game hits. Meta game creates winners and losers. Hacs have been loser for so long b/c they have no real purpose.... and how do you think any of these changes affect a purpose? They don't... they just make **** ships slightly less ****** than before. You can put a flower on a turd and make it smell better, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a turd. You really just proved my point, the balancing is almost at a good point now, Im still not happy about the Vaga but Im pretty much resigned to the fact that CCP don't want their to be a good kiting Minmatar HAC because then idiots who don't know how to counter such things would whine. We need to see these changes on TQ and take it from their, see how the meta changes and balance pass as it goes along.
How the hell does any of that support what you say? I already know what's going to happen on TQ with all of these b/c the changes are so mild and unimaginative. All they did on these is ever so slightly close the gap on tech 3s while making command ships overlap them far more than before... but by doing most things hacs did better. I doesn't even take a rocket scientist to see that.
This is not a spreadsheet issue, this is an experience issue.
|
Hell Bitch
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 11:22:00 -
[2080] - Quote
MJ Incognito wrote:Danny John-Peter wrote: Modules dedicated to 1 class of ship are generally pretty crap as they limit fitting choices.
To be honest, the HACs generally look in a good place at this point, the Eagle maybe needs a little more speed but I really think we need to see that one on TQ before we can say for sure, the Vaga needs a second falloff bonus to be a viable kiter, apart from that things are looking Ok.
OK compared to what? I'm sorry, but define what these ships do in game that's not already being done 50 times over by other ships, and almost always better and cheaper? A module dedicated to 1 ship in 1 slot to affect a role has no real impact on fitting choices... especially when you can give a bonus slot to every ship for that specific module. This is exactly my point... you guys think they're ok b/c they look better on a forum post and on a horrific simulation test server... you don't have a clue what's going to happen live when the meta game hits. Meta game creates winners and losers. Hacs have been loser for so long b/c they have no real purpose.... and how do you think any of these changes affect a purpose? They don't... they just make **** ships slightly less ****** than before. You can put a flower on a turd and make it smell better, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a turd.
I think i get what your trying to achieve, rather than just a numerical stat increase (spend more isk your ship has more numbers) you want a real role bonus. having mulled this over during a quiet morning at work i can see where your coming from and I'll try and re-iterate this, but in my own words, so that maybe others will see your point too.
Currently the problem that you see with Eves ship prgression is that it is pretty much a numbers game, and this is not unique to eve, a LOT of rpg ish games have this feature, such that end game you are pretty much doing the same as you were start game, just that all the numbers are bigger.
e.g you'll hit harder, have more hp, repair more blah blah bigger numbers but the core gameplay hasn't changed.
There are areas where isn't true, Stealth bombers, Dreads, Carriers......etc all have roles that define them as being different from the standard more numbers = better.
These roles give the pilot choice that extends beyond the fitting window, there are actually tactical choices to be made when flying those ships, do i drop cloak, go into seige, triage etc, they are all double edged and carry a trade off. The only choices to be made when flying these HAC's happens in the market and fitting screen.
The propsed HAC role bonus is pretty crap, unless i really want to fly a smaller MWD'ing cruiser, HAC as they stand are numerical increases, nothing more. And then the problem is that there are better options for going down the numerical increase route than the HAC's.
Seems like a fair point
|
|
sten mattson
1st Praetorian Guard Curatores Veritatis Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 12:42:00 -
[2081] - Quote
galessin wrote:ishtar has 3 useables bonus at the same time, all others HAC have 4.... something seems to be wrong...
Lazor weapon cap use anyone? Welcome to eve on hard mode IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!! |
Danny John-Peter
Stay Frosty.
288
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 12:53:00 -
[2082] - Quote
sten mattson wrote:galessin wrote:ishtar has 3 useables bonus at the same time, all others HAC have 4.... something seems to be wrong... Lazor weapon cap use anyone? Welcome to eve on hard mode
You can complain about that when scorch isn't amazing. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
130
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 13:23:00 -
[2083] - Quote
I have been looking for effective HAC counters to the deimos on Sisi.
First of all, let me be open about this. I prefer the get-in-close-and-blast-away style of fighting so I am happy to finally see a local rep a ship that can get a point and hold it like a terrier.
I am also concerned about game balance.
So I fitted up 2 zealots and tried them in turn against a willing sport on Sisi. He was in a DR deimos.
Note that a zealot in my view is a fleet ship, having no rep bonus etc. Not ideal for the role, but I wanted to see...
Here are the results: brawl fit: single rep + AB + 2 heat sinks + resists (active thermal). zealot lost, but not my much - deimos was in 2/3 structure. I had to blap his ec-600 drones quickly in order to keep a scram on him and dictate range. At 8.5km the zealot was in optimal for conflagration. the deimos's damage was very reduced.
Kite fit: single rep, 2 polycarbons, MWD and warp distruptor gave the zealot a 3 m/s base speed advantage over the deimos. In the end the zealot lost, probably more because I'm not an expert at maintaining range. Again, deimos was in structure. Even when he got me scrammed, I lasted quite a long time and caused him some pain.
In both cases, the zealot was pushing EM damage into what I assumed was his weakest resist.
Given that the deimos is designed for the job of brawling, it didn't easily overwhelm the zealot. I think it won fairly, as it should. But by no means by a wide margin.
I think the deimos is a powerful, strong ship able to hold a point for a long timem but I don't think it's OP.
/MC
|
Heribeck Weathers
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
79
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 14:13:00 -
[2084] - Quote
galessin wrote:ishtar has 3 useables bonus at the same time, all others HAC have 4.... something seems to be wrong...
CCP Rise has already said in the Dominix rebalance thread that the doble bonuses such as this one
7.5% bonus to Sentry Drone optimal range and tracking speed
Are efectivly two bonuses rolled into one, because if you look at say the Muninn, it has a serperate bonus for its main weapon systems range and one for its tracking. So in that regaurd the Ishtar is extreamly gifted with likely MORE bonuses than the rest. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
131
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 14:22:00 -
[2085] - Quote
I have just tried the cerberus with HMLs. It's pretty good!. 300 dps (with my rubbish missile skills) at 100km+ is pretty nice, and it's quick enough to stay out of range.
A few of these hurling pain into a brawl could work well.
I also think it's a very effective counter to falcons.
Sweet ship.
|
Heribeck Weathers
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
80
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 14:37:00 -
[2086] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:I have just tried the cerberus with HMLs. It's pretty good!. 300 dps (with my rubbish missile skills) at 100km+ is pretty nice, and it's quick enough to stay out of range.
A few of these hurling pain into a brawl could work well.
I also think it's a very effective counter to falcons.
Sweet ship.
Im not so sure, It can do close to 300 damage out to 200km now but its the damage delay out at sniper ranges that usualy turn people off from the ship, if their going to be at sniper ranges they usualy are going to fly Nados, Nagas, or maybe that new Eagle lol. Ijust see the 70k RLML Cerb and like 30 or was it 40km HAM cerb being used in small gangs far more often. RLML have better aplication and HAMs have better damage, I think the heavy missle nerf was a bit heavy handed but oh well. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
131
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 14:58:00 -
[2087] - Quote
Heribeck Weathers wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:I have just tried the cerberus with HMLs. It's pretty good!. 300 dps (with my rubbish missile skills) at 100km+ is pretty nice, and it's quick enough to stay out of range.
A few of these hurling pain into a brawl could work well.
I also think it's a very effective counter to falcons.
Sweet ship.
Im not so sure, It can do close to 300 damage out to 200km now but its the damage delay out at sniper ranges that usualy turn people off from the ship, if their going to be at sniper ranges they usualy are going to fly Nados, Nagas, or maybe that new Eagle lol. Ijust see the 70k RLML Cerb and like 30 or was it 40km HAM cerb being used in small gangs far more often. RLML have better aplication and HAMs have better damage, I think the heavy missle nerf was a bit heavy handed but oh well.
I was thinking ant-falcon since with a falcon all you really want to do is force it off the field while you kill it's DPS friends. It doesn't really matter whether the missile land or not. If he seems them coming he's going to bounce or lose a ship.
Hmm, hadn't thought of HAMs at 40km.. (!!)
Re the nerf, maybe, but before that a brawling ship couldn't get in range of a missile ship and railguns etc had no role at all.
But what CCP takes away with one hand, it gives with the other. Cruise missiles are amazing when coupled with a target painter or 2. As mentioned before, I lost a fleet-boosted dual rep deimos to 2 cruise ravens. I got to them from 100km, but by the time I was there I was in low armour and the next 2 volleys destroyed the ship.
No neuts, just applied cruise missile dps.
|
Heribeck Weathers
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
80
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 15:16:00 -
[2088] - Quote
Well Since ABCs came out i see far less falcons than i used to, I mostly see falcons paired with gate camps as added protection, or kinda as jam and run tactics. And yeah nano phoons with cruise missles are amazing missle skirmish/snipers. |
ArcticPrism
Bondage Goat Zombie Strictly Unprofessional
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 15:30:00 -
[2089] - Quote
Anyone have any comments about the Sacrilege changes? Most of the recent discussion seems to be about the Deimos, Vagabond and Eagle. |
Devon Weeks
Deadspace Defense Initiative Initiative Associates
35
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 15:38:00 -
[2090] - Quote
Quote:Anyone have any comments about the Sacrilege changes? Most of the recent discussion seems to be about the Deimos, Vagabond and Eagle.
In practice, it's doing quite well! I've seen one particularly skilled pilot show its mettle in a straight brawl with two Deimoses where he basically permatanked their damage. The match was more or less a stalemate, but I'd give the win to the Sac for lasting through it with full tank even though no ships died. |
|
Jysella Halcyon
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
44
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 16:19:00 -
[2091] - Quote
Hell ***** wrote:
I think i get what your trying to achieve, rather than just a numerical stat increase (spend more isk your ship has more numbers) you want a real role bonus. having mulled this over during a quiet morning at work i can see where your coming from and I'll try and re-iterate this, but in my own words, so that maybe others will see your point too.
Currently the problem that you see with Eves ship prgression is that it is pretty much a numbers game, and this is not unique to eve, a LOT of rpg ish games have this feature, such that end game you are pretty much doing the same as you were start game, just that all the numbers are bigger.
e.g you'll hit harder, have more hp, repair more blah blah bigger numbers but the core gameplay hasn't changed.
There are areas where isn't true, Stealth bombers, Dreads, Carriers......etc all have roles that define them as being different from the standard more numbers = better.
These roles give the pilot choice that extends beyond the fitting window, there are actually tactical choices to be made when flying those ships, do i drop cloak, go into seige, triage etc, they are all double edged and carry a trade off. The only choices to be made when flying these HAC's happens in the market and fitting screen.
The propsed HAC role bonus is pretty crap, unless i really want to fly a smaller MWD'ing cruiser, HAC as they stand are numerical increases, nothing more. And then the problem is that there are better options for going down the numerical increase route than the HAC's.
Seems like a fair point
Exactly. Every other T2 ship has something that it does par excelence. When T2 roles rely on being better at number than T1 and nothing else they fall by the wayside. Look at the Taranis After the Atron buff - sure, it was ever so slightly better at everything, but you don't run a Taranis in a fleet most of the time, you use it solo. Soloers die a lot, so telling them they can spend 3x more to get a tiny increase in numbers wasn't enough. people started flying the T1.
Hell, AFs are even the fast heavy tackle kings whule being T1+numbers. What about HACs will make them compelling to fly in a landscape like was talked up at FF 2013? What is their specialization? So far we're seeing that they play better with logistics (which need to be looked at) and don't get put in time-out as often by ECM (which is an un-fun mechanic that needs to be gutted and overhauled).
Why am I going to shell out T2 premiums outside of an SRP to fly these? Sure, I can do some really sick stuff with a Deimos, but I could do slightly less insane things with 6 thoraxes and have enough ISK left over for a Rifter.
=======
Off-topic: Rigs. Is there a rebalance coming for rigs? The current meta at cruiser and up of "patch resists/trimark/CDFE" with the occasional PG/CPU rig is really unhealthy. Are there any plans to make trimarks/CDFEs not the obvious default choice on a ship? |
Heribeck Weathers
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
80
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 16:45:00 -
[2092] - Quote
ArcticPrism wrote:Anyone have any comments about the Sacrilege changes? Most of the recent discussion seems to be about the Deimos, Vagabond and Eagle.
I wana hear more about the 100mn AB sac myself Im hearing rumors or rumors lol, but yeah im very interested in the sac |
ArcticPrism
Bondage Goat Zombie Strictly Unprofessional
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 16:47:00 -
[2093] - Quote
Devon Weeks wrote:Quote:Anyone have any comments about the Sacrilege changes? Most of the recent discussion seems to be about the Deimos, Vagabond and Eagle. In practice, it's doing quite well! I've seen one particularly skilled pilot show its mettle in a straight brawl with two Deimoses where he basically permatanked their damage. The match was more or less a stalemate, but I'd give the win to the Sac for lasting through it with full tank even though no ships died.
Wasn't the Sacrilege already capable of this though? It has worse cap recharge than before and the range bonus vs blaster Deimos ships does nothing for it. The only thing I've noticed with the pg increase is that you can fit medium nos/neut rather than small. |
Doed
Tyrfing Industries Viro Mors Non Est
34
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 17:54:00 -
[2094] - Quote
ArcticPrism wrote:Devon Weeks wrote:Quote:Anyone have any comments about the Sacrilege changes? Most of the recent discussion seems to be about the Deimos, Vagabond and Eagle. In practice, it's doing quite well! I've seen one particularly skilled pilot show its mettle in a straight brawl with two Deimoses where he basically permatanked their damage. The match was more or less a stalemate, but I'd give the win to the Sac for lasting through it with full tank even though no ships died. Wasn't the Sacrilege already capable of this though? It has worse cap recharge than before and the range bonus vs blaster Deimos ships does nothing for it. The only thing I've noticed with the pg increase is that you can fit medium nos/neut rather than small. It's tank is also worse than before thanks to the global resist bonus nerf. It has better cap than before
|
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
131
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 19:06:00 -
[2095] - Quote
Someone was asking about the sacrilege?
I tried one with dual rep, 1 ballistic, 5 heavy assaults and 1 heavy pulse, web and scram.
It's epic :-)
Killed an ishtar then evaded a vaga + deimos because I had to go out to dinner.
nice ship.
|
Aplier Shivra
6
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 19:11:00 -
[2096] - Quote
So just out of curiosity, why aren't heavy assault battlecruisers getting the same extra cap as heavy assault cruiser to go along with the lock range and sensor strength buffs they're all getting? HABC's are still at 4.5 cap/second despite being larger hulls and receiving the other electronics buffs. |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
269
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 19:20:00 -
[2097] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Harvey James wrote:
...
Deimos - high sig should be 130 at most - needs its utility high back .. just increase damage bonuses - stronger falloff bonus for blasterboats
I spent 12 hours on sisi yesterday flying around in a dual rep deimos. So here's how it really panned out: 1. I was in a gang with astarte, vaga and my deimos. 2. we had skirmish and armour gang links
Because we all fly with a $15/month alt in skirmish links. Like i said earlier, not everyone can/is willing to pay for a booster alt, so arguing "this ship is so great, you only have to spend 1.5b on a ship for your alt and its implants!" is invalid. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Vayn Baxtor
Ultra High Ping Crew Spears of Destiny
74
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 19:46:00 -
[2098] - Quote
Heh, Buffbots. Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all. |
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
169
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 19:48:00 -
[2099] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:Harvey James wrote:
...
Deimos - high sig should be 130 at most - needs its utility high back .. just increase damage bonuses - stronger falloff bonus for blasterboats
I spent 12 hours on sisi yesterday flying around in a dual rep deimos. So here's how it really panned out: 1. I was in a gang with astarte, vaga and my deimos. 2. we had skirmish and armour gang links Because we all fly with a $15/month alt in skirmish links. Like i said earlier, not everyone can/is willing to pay for a booster alt, so arguing "this ship is so great, you only have to spend 1.5b on a ship for your alt and its implants!" is invalid.
Its invalid on a frig, someone who has the isk to go out soloing in a hac either is daft or has a link alts (or is super rich, i.e can easily afford a link alt).
Hacs will be flown with link 90% and more of the time they are used. |
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
156
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 20:29:00 -
[2100] - Quote
W0lf Crendraven wrote:Hacs will be flown with link 90% and more of the time they are used.
It was about time. I agree.
I only correct my own spelling. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 [70] 80 .. 89 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |