Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |

Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
3335
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 10:55:00 -
[301] - Quote
4gn1 wrote:I am an interceptor pilot with over 700 sucessfull initial tackles and therfore kills in the last 5 months. I am purely piloting this ships in nullsec day in day out.
I cannot understand the cheer for this changes and I explain it to me that most of the people cheering are not flying this things often - and if - not really correctly.
I dont need bubble immunity, a Interceptor is fast enough so a bubble hardly exists. There are even situations where I want to land in a bubble. Now my immunity saves some of the prey from beeing catched. I dont say its complete bullshit but its really not something the interceptor really needed. And nothing to freak out about it. ( As already stated the interdictor really needed this not interceptors. )
Warping instant feels like teleporting in some ranges not like flying a spaceship. So basically we will have this frigs now as uncatchable " I-travel-where-I-want" frigates. And interceptors wont catch them too.
Taking the example of the ares with no boni-links.
After the Patch it will loose both in HP and Speed significantly ( The increase in Speed with a Prop mod due to the mass loss is a blant lie as testet on SiSi )
Due to this you cant fit nanos anymore as the Interceptor were already too much of a paper plane and their speed didnt help a **** especially when they need to apply a short point they die way too fast even with all existing piloting tricks which are already incredible hard to pull off.
I still need a ionic field rig for sufficient targeting range. So no way to make up for the speed loss.
The tracking bonus was actually usefull against drones. The damage "increase" as we have it now on sisi is laughable and doesnt make up for the loss.
Combined with the speed loss drones are even more dangerous to us now as they were before.
All in all this is a unbelievable nerf to this particular ship were we needed a Buff so bad to be able to get competitive again towards ships we need to tackle and hold that got buffed into the sky over the last patches.
What are you talking about? Intys were always paper. Whether they're tissue paper or single ply toilet paper doesn't matter when you're dodging bears and wolves. As for "piloting tricks", they're actually very easy to pull off after even casual practice. Also, warp speed was never what made frigates hard to catch - and bubbles will still catch them. Interceptors get to ignore bubbles, but they still die when sneezed at, so it really isn't that big a deal.
Also, this.
|

Mr Doctor
Los Polos Hermanos. Happy Cartel
70
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 11:02:00 -
[302] - Quote
Its amazing how symmetry can make an ugly ship so pretty. |

Brib Vogt
DC-centre Destiny's Call
12
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 11:27:00 -
[303] - Quote
Randy Wray wrote:4gn1 wrote:I am an interceptor pilot ... - ... over the last patches. Fozzie, this guy ^ nailed it. Remove this stupid bubble immunity, give all the interceptors another slot. Personally as a long time interceptor pilot I think all the tackle specialized ones should have the ability to fit a nosferatu so that they can get up close and scram tackle ships with neuts. They should all have the ability to fit a fair amount of tank without hurting their mobility or general role on the battlefield. The tackle interceptors should all have bonuses and damage application good enough to be able to handle a wave of warriors. The combat interceptors should in my opinion be similar to AFs in dps potential but exchange a substantially lower tank(about half, kinda what they have now) for speed. The role of the combat ceptors has always been anti-tackle. Buffing combat ceptors like I proposed would give a sense of scalability. As long as you don't make them very tanky we shouldn't get the problem that we had with the dramiel back in 2011 since it was pretty much like an interceptor and an AF built into the same ship.
True |

Capqu
Love Squad
343
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 12:11:00 -
[304] - Quote
to everyone saying you need a nos to keep a scram on a ship with a neut
you really don't
neuts don't turn scrams off unless you are the unluckiest person in the entire world, a scram needs 0.75GJ to activate, even from 0 capacitor a stiletto will regenerate that in 1/6th of a second. if you're having trouble keeping a scram running against a 12 second cycle time med neut (or heaven forbid, a 24 second cycle heavy neut) then i don't know what to tell you http://pizza.eve-kill.net |

Capqu
Love Squad
343
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 12:13:00 -
[305] - Quote
but yeah if you're not gonna give us lockrange at least put the turret slots back on the malediction http://pizza.eve-kill.net |

Royaldo
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch. Sev3rance
59
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 12:13:00 -
[306] - Quote
The bubble immunity + the new warp speed makes ceptors silly.
What is supposed to catch these?
|

Mr Doctor
Los Polos Hermanos. Happy Cartel
70
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 12:17:00 -
[307] - Quote
Lag. |

Randy Wray
Nova Ardour
64
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 12:18:00 -
[308] - Quote
Capqu wrote:to everyone saying you need a nos to keep a scram on a ship with a neut
you really don't
neuts don't turn scrams off unless you are the unluckiest person in the entire world, a scram needs 0.75GJ to activate, even from 0 capacitor a stiletto will regenerate that in 1/6th of a second. if you're having trouble keeping a scram running against a 12 second cycle time med neut (or heaven forbid, a 24 second cycle heavy neut) then i don't know what to tell you I just fought a jaguar in my medium neut hurricane, fight lasted 2 minutes and I turned of his scram 5+ times. I know jag doesn't have the cap bonus but he did have a nos. Solo Pvper in all areas of space including wormhole space. Check out my youtube channel @-áhttp://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd6M3xV43Af-3E1ds0tTyew/feed for mostly small scale pvp in lowsec/nullsec
twitch.tv/randywray |

Kalar Freno
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 12:45:00 -
[309] - Quote
post deleted |

Andrea Keuvo
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 12:50:00 -
[310] - Quote
Royaldo wrote:The bubble immunity + the new warp speed makes ceptors silly.
What is supposed to catch these?
This. Ratting/mining in null is going to be so much fun now. Every neut gang will have multiple bubble proof instawarp nanopussy interceptors running down the pipes to grab and hold targets while the dps ships never have to put themselves in any danger unless something gets tackled.
No battleship or mining barge has any chance of warping out to safety when one of these shows up in system as they will be in your site even if you start to align the second you see them in local. |

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1491
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 13:19:00 -
[311] - Quote
Brib Vogt wrote:Randy Wray wrote:4gn1 wrote:I am an interceptor pilot ... - ... over the last patches. Fozzie, this guy ^ nailed it. Remove this stupid bubble immunity, give all the interceptors another slot. Personally as a long time interceptor pilot I think all the tackle specialized ones should have the ability to fit a nosferatu so that they can get up close and scram tackle ships with neuts. They should all have the ability to fit a fair amount of tank without hurting their mobility or general role on the battlefield. The tackle interceptors should all have bonuses and damage application good enough to be able to handle a wave of warriors. The combat interceptors should in my opinion be similar to AFs in dps potential but exchange a substantially lower tank(about half, kinda what they have now) for speed. The role of the combat ceptors has always been anti-tackle. Buffing combat ceptors like I proposed would give a sense of scalability. As long as you don't make them very tanky we shouldn't get the problem that we had with the dramiel back in 2011 since it was pretty much like an interceptor and an AF built into the same ship. True
Bubble immunity + warp speed changes are the biggest buff inties could ever have gotten. If you don't agree you're either bad or you havn't tried warping around in one on the test server, its ******* unreal. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |

Cardano Firesnake
Babylon Knights Renegades Council
77
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 13:34:00 -
[312] - Quote
Please take a time to look how the turrets are placed on the modified ships.....
|

Anthar Thebess
REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN
143
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 13:39:00 -
[313] - Quote
A.Make Interceptors nullified only when fitted by proper rig (new tech 3 rig reserved only for this class of ships). Why? To make people choose - this rig or bigger dps/defence - not just downgrade all interceptors hull.
B.Instead of reducing their cargo bay add to their specifications that they cannot fit a cyno.
|

MainDrain
7th Deepari Defence Armada SpaceMonkey's Alliance
216
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 13:41:00 -
[314] - Quote
The ability to lock targets as you enter grid but are still in warp, not able to activate modules, just lock the target, will give a true interceptor feel to it.
However the warp speed! wow those little buggers are so quick off the mark now!! |

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1491
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 13:44:00 -
[315] - Quote
MainDrain wrote:The ability to lock targets as you enter grid but are still in warp, not able to activate modules, just lock the target, will give a true interceptor feel to it.
However the warp speed! wow those little buggers are so quick off the mark now!!
You exit war much faster now, in my tests you can lock stuff pretty much the moment you load grid. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |

Sparkus Volundar
Applied Creations The Fendahlian Collective
69
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 14:05:00 -
[316] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: You'll also notice we kinda devestated the cargo capacity of all the Interceptors. The intention is that if you want to use their bubble immunity for a cyno ship, you have to put some work into it and gimp your fit a tad.
In the UK (elsewhere too?), "you have to put some work into it" implies it could be hard. Not sure if that was the intended meaning here or not though. But just to note, it doesnGÇÖt look like itGÇÖs going to be hard.
- With Cynosural Field Theory V, just one Small Cargohold Optimization I rig is needed by all hulls. - With CFT IV, one Expanded Cargohold II is enough for 3 hulls or two T1 rigs is enough for 7 of them.
Since whatever Intie is lighting a cyno is then unable to do much in the way of speed tanking or range-control to make using DPS equipment that useful, losing 1 rig or low slot for such an item is probably not going to make a huge impact on survivability. . |

Axe Coldon
Coldon Enterprises Axion Bionics
9
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 14:26:00 -
[317] - Quote
I know no one cares, but I am AGAINST Bubble Immunity. |

Capqu
Love Squad
344
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 15:35:00 -
[318] - Quote
Randy Wray wrote:Capqu wrote:to everyone saying you need a nos to keep a scram on a ship with a neut
you really don't
neuts don't turn scrams off unless you are the unluckiest person in the entire world, a scram needs 0.75GJ to activate, even from 0 capacitor a stiletto will regenerate that in 1/6th of a second. if you're having trouble keeping a scram running against a 12 second cycle time med neut (or heaven forbid, a 24 second cycle heavy neut) then i don't know what to tell you I just fought a jaguar in my medium neut hurricane, fight lasted 2 minutes and I turned of his scram 5+ times. I know jag doesn't have the cap bonus but he did have a nos.
an 80% cap bonus is a big deal, better than a nos http://pizza.eve-kill.net |

Morwennon
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 15:46:00 -
[319] - Quote
Capqu wrote:but yeah if you're not gonna give us lockrange at least put the turret slots back on the malediction Why would you want the turret slots back? As far as I can see, it has plenty of fitting room for both rockets and light missile launchers, in both brawling and tackle configurations. What specific fit do you have in mind? |

Morwennon
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 16:08:00 -
[320] - Quote
Anyway, been playing with the combat interceptors on SiSi and would say that the Crusader is now outstanding for running around ganking other frigates (200 heated dps with scorch out to the edge of scram range is very nice indeed). The Taranis is also still very capable. However, the Claw and the Raptor seem quite underwhelming - the Claw just doesn't really have the DPS to do the kind of gank and run things that the ranis and sader are capable of, and doesn't have any compensatory advantages so it just seems kind of weak by comparison. It could really use either a significant increase in raw damage or a bonus to projection of some kind. The raptor is also in an uncomfortable place - its DPS is mediocre (a dual magstab neutron fit can't even break 200 dps with null, whereas the sader comfortably hits that figure at a much better range with the same number of damage mods), and the slot layout is very awkward since it can't do a decent shield tank without giving up tackle. It's better than it was, but still pretty lackluster. |

Thaddeus Eggeras
TwoTenX LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
39
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 16:10:00 -
[321] - Quote
OP! OP! OP! |

Benito Arias
Lutinari Syndicate Electus Matari
18
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 16:14:00 -
[322] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:SPECIFICS
CLAW
STILETTO
Claw is still sub-optimal. Even more likely to explode quickly inside web/neut range (no ulility high). Do not want arties to kite something because drones and too small tank, cannot even try with ACs for it anymore (TE nerf). Capacitor on the Claw is still meh compared to the Slasher.
Stiletto remains good , but still gets beaten by the Slasher in Scan Resolution and Capacitor, which I think is strange.
Claw Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 285(+4.75) / 213.75s (+2.8) / 1.33
Stiletto Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 250 / 187.5s / 1.33 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 27.5km(+2.5) / 925 / 5(+1)
Slasher (not copypasting, using Pyfa) Capacitor 240 / 120 (!!) / whatever Targeting 22.5km / 940 (!!) / 4
Why is it so?
Please make T2 interceptors at least not worse than T1 frigates in acquiring targets and running mods. Please do it before adding weird role bonuses that do not always work towards intercepting and tackling.
Edit: Correction. There IS an utility high on the Claw. |

Capqu
Love Squad
344
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 16:28:00 -
[323] - Quote
Morwennon wrote:Capqu wrote:but yeah if you're not gonna give us lockrange at least put the turret slots back on the malediction Why would you want the turret slots back? As far as I can see, it has plenty of fitting room for both rockets and light missile launchers, in both brawling and tackle configurations. What specific fit do you have in mind?
[Malediction, a1]
Damage Control II Energized Armor Layering Membrane II 200mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I 1MN Afterburner II Warp Disruptor II
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S Core Probe Launcher I, Sisters Core Scanner Probe /OFFLINE
Small Ionic Field Projector I Small Ionic Field Projector I
is the fit i used to use for armor fleets, was very good at staying alive on pretty hostile grids i'm sure its not a perfect fit or absolutely fantastic or anything, but its nice to have the option to use very low fitting anti-drone weapons and use your cpu/pg elsewhere http://pizza.eve-kill.net |

rei natuski
Perkone Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 17:01:00 -
[324] - Quote
i have another idea... why not supress dictor from the game ?
they become useless. |

Morwennon
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 17:10:00 -
[325] - Quote
Capqu wrote:Morwennon wrote:Capqu wrote:but yeah if you're not gonna give us lockrange at least put the turret slots back on the malediction Why would you want the turret slots back? As far as I can see, it has plenty of fitting room for both rockets and light missile launchers, in both brawling and tackle configurations. What specific fit do you have in mind? [Malediction, a1] Damage Control II Energized Armor Layering Membrane II 200mm Reinforced Steel Plates II Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I 1MN Afterburner II Warp Disruptor II 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S Core Probe Launcher I, Sisters Core Scanner Probe /OFFLINE Small Ionic Field Projector I Small Ionic Field Projector I is the fit i used to use for armor fleets, was very good at staying alive on pretty hostile grids i'm sure its not a perfect fit or absolutely fantastic or anything, but its nice to have the option to use very low fitting anti-drone weapons and use your cpu/pg elsewhere Fair enough, I hadn't considered that you might want dualprop and a plate. However, afaict the rubicon malediction can do basically the same thing:
[Malediction, a1 rubicon] Micro Auxiliary Power Core II 200mm Reinforced Steel Plates II Damage Control II Adaptive Nano Plating II
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I 1MN Afterburner II Warp Disruptor II
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket
Small Ionic Field Projector I Small Ionic Field Projector I
Gains an extra 100 EHP, slightly better resists, and 10 km of lock range in exchange for the offlined probe launcher; overall, I'd say that's a pretty good trade. |

Capqu
Love Squad
344
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 17:12:00 -
[326] - Quote
Morwennon wrote:Capqu wrote:Morwennon wrote:Capqu wrote:but yeah if you're not gonna give us lockrange at least put the turret slots back on the malediction Why would you want the turret slots back? As far as I can see, it has plenty of fitting room for both rockets and light missile launchers, in both brawling and tackle configurations. What specific fit do you have in mind? [Malediction, a1] Damage Control II Energized Armor Layering Membrane II 200mm Reinforced Steel Plates II Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I 1MN Afterburner II Warp Disruptor II 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S Core Probe Launcher I, Sisters Core Scanner Probe /OFFLINE Small Ionic Field Projector I Small Ionic Field Projector I is the fit i used to use for armor fleets, was very good at staying alive on pretty hostile grids i'm sure its not a perfect fit or absolutely fantastic or anything, but its nice to have the option to use very low fitting anti-drone weapons and use your cpu/pg elsewhere Fair enough, I hadn't considered that you might want dualprop and a plate. However, afaict the rubicon malediction can do basically the same thing: [Malediction, a1 rubicon] Micro Auxiliary Power Core II 200mm Reinforced Steel Plates II Damage Control II Adaptive Nano Plating II Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I 1MN Afterburner II Warp Disruptor II Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Small Ionic Field Projector I Small Ionic Field Projector I Gains an extra 100 EHP, slightly better resists, and 10 km of lock range in exchange for the offlined probe launcher; overall, I'd say that's a pretty good trade.
you're right of course, that is a better fit - however imagine you could fit 125mms instead of rockets. you could drop the maux, upgrade the plating to an enam, use a sig amp and have some warp speed rigs perhaps. i just feel like taking away options is never a good thing
http://pizza.eve-kill.net |

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1494
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 17:29:00 -
[327] - Quote
Ok after looking at the warp changes i'm feeling a lot more positive about these ships. I do however think they require to be better rebalanced within their class, i think they should all be about as powerful as the taranis/claw.
Crusader: Bad for lowsec but i think its probably fine as is for 0.0.
Malediction: Needs a bigger damage bonus, (not a ROF, i need to reload enough already thank you kindly)
Raptor: Its pretty hard to fit guns and a tank on it, id suggest enough pg to fit a meta MSE and electrons personally.
Crow: Is probably going to be incredibly powerful with the extra point range and lml's.
Taranis: I can we please let go of the "lol the ranis's tank is all in hull" joke? Honestly it would be a much better ship with more armor and less structure. could use slightly more pg.
Ares: I really dislike missiles on this (Why do all the races need missiles? If you go through with this every single race in the game will have a missile ship /o\ ) also it needs a ton of fittings, its really almost impossible to fit anything on it.
Stiletto: Its.. fine?
Claw: The fitting differences between AC's and ARties need to be rebalanced so that this ship can get more reasonable fittings. Although tbh i wouldn't mind if all the inties could be fitted like a claw with AC's. That would be pretty baller.
So yea much less hate, i think the strong ones are good, the weak ones just need to be brought to that level. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |

XavierVE
Reasonable People Of Sound Mind
198
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 17:53:00 -
[328] - Quote
Royaldo wrote:The bubble immunity + the new warp speed makes ceptors silly.
What is supposed to catch these?
Nothing can catch them. Fozzie has made a ship that is impossible to engage unless it wants to fight. Any smart interceptor pilot knows what fights they can and can't take -- meaning that the ship is absolutely ungankable unless they make a major mistake. This is a good example of why devs shouldn't listen to player ideas which really aren't all that thought through.
It is a major buff to home defense blobs against non-interceptor gangs though, given that the main recourse of retreat for a small gang roam into 0.0 is dropping bubbles behind it... a tactic that is absolutely nerfed into the ground now. Sure, you can kill the 30+ man blob's 4-5 interceptors if you get far enough ahead, but aggression means loggoffski as the gang then catches up to you.
What is going to be HILARIOUS is when people start taking out small gangs of only Taranis to gank ratters. I suggested it to my guys in my "I'm quitting, sorry!" post about this change. You'll have more than enough DPS to kill any non-carrier ratter you run across and you will absolutely be impossible to kill unless you make a mistake killing a ratter. By say, not moving at all, heh.
The idea behind this change is to remove the effectiveness of spamming anchored bubbles on gates. A simpler solution that wouldn't be overpowered would have been to restrict the anchoring of bubbles to within 40km of gates, much akin to how you can't anchor a GSC within X distance of a gate. Such a change would also "fix" large bubbles spammed on regional gates as well. It would buff every ship class roaming through 0.0 and remove non-player bubbling of gates, making 'dictor pilots and HIC's more worthwhile, rather than less.
Instead, Fozzie decided to give nullification to a ship class that simply does not need it on any level. Interceptors have no problems getting through gate camps, either by simply running away or gate crashing. Now, he's created a situation where if you're a small gang FC that likes to roam through 0.0, you're incredibly stupid not to take out Taranis-only gangs to get incredibly easy ratter ganks. Way too easymode to be fun. EVE is supposed to be a challenge. Nullification takes a player skill and turns it into a ship skill. Bad.
I don't think Fozzie is stupid, so once he realizes that the warp speed changes are all that interceptors needed for the ship class to be buffed to the max... then hopefully he'll remove nullification as the game-breaking mistake it so truly is. |

Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin Point Blank Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 18:06:00 -
[329] - Quote
I wont say I have the familiarization with the relationship of the other intys to their t1 counterparts but they don't seem to be quite in line, nullification aside.
Atron vs. Taranis Atron: all lvl 5 no speed mods mwd: 3859/5526 10% falloff bonus gives it better damage projection: 10k with null mass: 1.05m kg 37pg 3 rigs that give it even more flexibility, especially in pg
Taranis: all lvl 5 no speed mods mwd: 3816/5462 no falloff bonus: 6.1k with null mass: 1.07m kg 35pg 2 rigs
Sure the ranis does better damage and tracks better but with poor projection it wont matter if you cant dictate range. If both ships are in scram/web/ab configurations, the atron should win if he just keeps at range at 8k, and kills those 2 drones. The atron is faster, more nimble, has more powergrid, and further damage projection. This seems to be out of line. Shouldn't the t2 combat variant of the atron actually be better than the t1?
Keres > Mallus Ishkur/Enyo > Incursus Deimos/Phobos > Thorax Astarte/Eos > Brutix
I feel the intys need another combat bonus and a bit more of a tweek to get them in line with their t1 counterparts. (I havent done the wealth of research on the others, so I wont suggest for them specifically.) In particular for the ranis I suggest:
+7.5% bonus to small hybrid turret falloff (to accompany its 7.5% to tracking) Lower mass from 1.07m kg to 1.03m kg Buff powergrid to at least 37, preferably 39
Bubble immunity is great, but when on the field it really doesn't matter. I do recognize the mwd bloom reduction helps on the approach for fighting upclass, which it doesn't do poorly. It does however suffer when fighting same (hull) class ships. I do not wish to "win button" the ranis, and I don't believe my suggestion would do so. Recruiting |

Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
8
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 18:53:00 -
[330] - Quote
I really feel that those of you against nullified intys are not being vocal enough. This will change the game we love, this will give more power to the major blocs (the ability to project fleets and super caps across the map in mere minutes).
This in general is not a good change for null sec.
If you are against nullified intys, SPEAK UP! Get your friends and corp mates to speak up. Fozzie will be reading this thread regularly so if we voice our concerns about this maybe CCP will at least re-think the idea! |
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |