Author
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Jenny Spitfire
Posted - 2006.04.22 12:59:00 -
[1 ]
Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 22/04/2006 13:00:57 Originally by: Jim McGregor Ive seen mostly posts about hac prices (and some other posts... btw, have you noticed Missile Launcher II sells for 7 million each now? But anyway...). My guess is that CCP wants the system to work this way. I see both advantages and disadvantages with it. CCP can indirectly control T2 prices. 1. More BPOs. Not a good idea. 2. More BPCs. Better idea. 3. More high-end named loot drop i.e. near T2 but named T1s. Not a good idea too coz named items all dropped in prices but players still not happy with T2. 4. Wait for Kali. /me thinks most players are T2 capable just lacking of T2 mentality. Dont think anyone needs T2 to win/play. ----------------RecruitMe@NOINT! RAWR!11 Sig Hijack!11 - Imaran
Jenny Spitfire
Posted - 2006.04.22 15:37:00 -
[2 ]
Originally by: Hellspawn666 I think the t2 whine threads are less based around the fact that t2 costs alot more, i mean we expect it to cost more since its t2 but its still meant to be proportional to otehr t2 gear which is why people say that it is "broken". HACs costing up to 180 mil with somthing like 8 mil insurance is a tad extream when you compair it to say sensor booster 2's. I admit that hacs should be expensive but only if ure willing to further limit the supply of other t2 items so it is in line with hacs. CCP need to learn that too much player control over certain items just makes gameplay slow and boring for those without bpos. Hacs at 80 mil ish is fair and thats how they were released, i cant simply believe that its supply and demand and if thats the case i want ccp to say so not just some forum muppet to shout about it. Well, everything in EvE is about ISKs. When you kill someone, it hurts because they lose ISKs. PvP is all about ISKs damage isnt it? If I am an alliance, I would be increasing T2 items until the point where nobody will buy them anymore because everytime when someone loses them, it will hurt them badly. Want to destroy an alliance, hurt their wallets first, then you will hurt them. ----------------RecruitMe@NOINT! RAWR!11 Sig Hijack!11 - Imaran
Jenny Spitfire
Posted - 2006.04.22 18:13:00 -
[3 ]
Originally by: Kata Dakini Explaining the usefulness of some tech 2 items, and at the same time explaining how other tech 2 items are really not that good, kind of seems like a headache waiting to EVE Online | EVE Insider | Forums
Jenny Spitfire
Posted - 2006.04.22 18:13:00 -
[4 ]
Originally by: Kata Dakini Explaining the usefulness of some tech 2 items, and at the same time explaining how other tech 2 items are really not that good, kind of seems like a headache waiting to happen. People should check out killboard and see how people are killed in T1 ships. ----------------RecruitMe@NOINT! RAWR!11 Sig Hijack!11 - Imaran
Jenny Spitfire
Posted - 2006.04.22 18:32:00 -
[5 ]
Originally by: Kata Dakini Originally by: Jenny Spitfire People should check out killboard and see how people are killed in T1 ships. Could you be any more ambiguous? I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. What does the word "how" mean in this context? That people should look at killboards and see that people in T2 ships are using better items when killing T1 ships? (Did you see how that guy killed my T1 ship? What did he use?) Are you saying that there are more T1 ship losses relative to T2 ship losses? (Boy look how T1 ships are killed compared to T2.) Please clarify your post. T1 ships can easily ripped apart T2 ships. Rocket Kestrels and Blaster Merlins with tracking disruptor can give most interceptor pilot a headache. Methinks most people need to free thier minds of T2 mind set. T1 ships with T2 weapons can also be effective. You do not need everything T2. Everything is T2 is getting more expensive because everyone thinks they need and must have T2 to win. T2 != Win. T2 == More chances to win. ----------------RecruitMe@NOINT! RAWR!11 Sig Hijack!11 - Imaran