Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 35 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 21 post(s) |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6805
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:25:00 -
[421] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Yes this is a relative buff to the Wyvern, and yes that is intentional. However it's much less of a buff than you seem to think it is because the vast majority of Supercarrier use is in situations where they can refit at will, allowing clever pilots to switch between high tank and high damage fits as needed.
what about that a nyx is now strictly inferior to an aeon? Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Disadvantaged Persons Outreach Division:
"We hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Tarsas Phage
Freight Club
274
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:25:00 -
[422] - Quote
seth Hendar wrote: htfu.
it is the same feeling than being blaped flying a 3-4B macha / vindi by a isboxer kevin boxing 10 nados, yet the only answer we have, from both CCP and plaers, is HTFU, so HTFU, why should it be different in this case? because you fly a giant carrier? you don't even loose the thing in your described scenario!
I've got a hunch here that you're no super pilot.
When there's a gaggle of supers in the process of booshing something, all their fibos are moving in synchronously, all bunched together and often over 30-50km distances to and from their target.
So when you have, say, 10 supers' worth of fibos running around bunched up (because that's just what they do), all it takes is 1 guy isbox'ing 6-7 bombers to wipe out 200 fibos. That's 90k-100k of DPS and roughly 7bn in fibos gone in a blink of an eye. When you see the bombers decloak, you can't make them move faster, you can't make them zig or zag or do something to get out of the bombs' AoE, all you are left to do is sit there and tab over to your indy alt to start scrounging up some replacements as you watch your current flight disappear into the ether.
Multiply occurrences like that by it happening 2-3 times a week during a burn+grind campaign and maybe, just maybe you might start to get a sense of how stupid that whole situation is. |
Nira Meru
Codename-47 Chained Reactions
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:25:00 -
[423] - Quote
Rikard Nomm wrote:Nira Meru wrote:Rikard Nomm wrote:did i miss it completely, or has there been no mention of what Racial Drone Spec level will be required to use T2 sentries? will it be Racial Spec IV like the heavies? That seems to make the most sense given they both use the same bandwidth therefore are the same "size" weapon system.
Some confirmation would be neat tho. Sentries require no racial now i don't know why the would in the future, sentry drone interfacing skill is pretty high level skill to need. quoted from dev blog, see text i put in bold: Quote:For quality levels, Tech Two sentry drones are currently massive upgrades over their Tech One equivalents since range, tracking and damage are all such important attributes for sentries. We will be keeping the 20% bonuses to hitpoints, tracking, optimal, and falloff that Tech Two enjoys over Tech One; but instead of the current 20% increase in damage over T1, we will be increasing the base damage multiplier of Tech One sentries and limiting the Tech Two advantage to the 2% per level gained from the racial Drone Specialization skills that will now be required to use T2 sentries.
So it's a massive F you to every sentry pilot who doesn't have heavies... no seriosuly why would i ever use sentries over heavies again? |
Masao Kurata
Z List
48
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:25:00 -
[424] - Quote
Mostly good stuff but I'm confused by you first stating that drones are too skill intensive a weapons system followed by an increase in the total SP required for that system by splitting the combat drone operation skill. Every time you do this you make new players less competent because of their age, this is not a good thing for the game. Unless of course you're turning it into two 1x skills, in which case good change.
Like most people I really have to agree that there's still no compelling reason to use caldari or amarr drones with the proposed changes. Maybe they could be given new classes to be best in, such as lowest signature radius, best tracking (leaving minmatar with best mwd speed) or best durability. |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
85
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:28:00 -
[425] - Quote
Fozzie, a couple of skill related questions;
- as someone else has asked, what level of the drone spec will be required for T2 sentries?
- the skill which is being split, Combat Drone Operations, is not currently the skill which gives you access to T1 and T2 light/medium drones, this is Scout Drone Operations. Does this mean it will be possible to lose access to T2 drones that you currently can use if you have Scout Drone Operations V, but not Combat Drone Operations V? As far as I can tell, this would lead to you getting the new prerequisites for the light/medium drones at a lower level, meaning you couldn't use the T2 drones any more. This should perhaps be made clearer, as it is not immediately obvious going by your usual logic of "if you can fly it before, you can fly it after." |
Janes Shield
Frozen Dawn Inc Frozen Dawn Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:29:00 -
[426] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Obil Que wrote: Can you address the question of access to racial T2 sentries for those with Sentry Drone Interfacing trained to V. As it stands, those with that skill will lose access to existing weapons when the requirement for racial skills is implemented. Will those pilots receive the minimum level of racial skill to compensate?
Players will not be given racial drone spec skills. We're announcing this change early so that players have plenty of time to train the skills before the patch.
Well, you could at least tell what is the racial drone skill level requirement for operating T2 sentries instead of being all secretive about it :( |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3364
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:30:00 -
[427] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:- We are hearing the feedback from those of you who argue that this change doesn't go far enough to make the Caldari and Amarr drones competitive. It is too soon to announce anything else yet but we're taking this feedback to heart.
Wild guess: most ships have substantial kinetic resist.
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
5566
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:31:00 -
[428] - Quote
As an aside, I'd still like to have a drone option where the drones simply orbited your own ship, as a destructible but hard to hit weapons system.
Actually, it kind of sounds like a good fit for heavy drones, and travel time has always been the main drawback to them. Obviously it would mean they would need their effective ranges reworked.
To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
510
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:33:00 -
[429] - Quote
Drak Fel wrote:
I'm not saying it should be impossible, but requiring more than one wave of bombs to do it seems reasonable.
it is just a matter of wave size, just put 2*more bomber.
in fact, since the HP will be buffed, and the volume doubled, you will have twice less bomber, for same DPS, with twice more HP, so it will require twice the number of bomb to destroy them
now, each bomb damage the next if too close, actually limiting the number of bombs / wave
if said limit is let's say 12 bombs / wave, and now it is required 10 to kill FB, after update it'll require 20....but 20 in one wave is not possible, require then 2 waves, wich is harder to sync, and give more time to recall FB.
from this POV, FB are now more likely to actually survive a bombing run (indeed depends max number of concurrent bombs, but at least, they won't be MORE vulnerable than actually) |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
595
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:33:00 -
[430] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:As an aside, I'd still like to have a drone option where the drones simply orbited your own ship, as a destructible but hard to hit weapons system.
Actually, it kind of sounds like a good fit for heavy drones, and travel time has always been the main drawback to them. Obviously it would mean they would need their effective ranges reworked.
even better fit for sentry drones |
|
seth Hendar
I love you miners
510
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:39:00 -
[431] - Quote
Tarsas Phage wrote:seth Hendar wrote: htfu.
it is the same feeling than being blaped flying a 3-4B macha / vindi by a isboxer kevin boxing 10 nados, yet the only answer we have, from both CCP and plaers, is HTFU, so HTFU, why should it be different in this case? because you fly a giant carrier? you don't even loose the thing in your described scenario!
I've got a hunch here that you're no super pilot. When there's a gaggle of supers in the process of booshing something, all their fibos are moving in synchronously, all bunched together and often over 30-50km distances to and from their target. So when you have, say, 10 supers' worth of fibos running around bunched up (because that's just what they do), all it takes is 1 guy isbox'ing 6-7 bombers to wipe out 200 fibos. That's 90k-100k of DPS and roughly 7bn in fibos gone in a blink of an eye. When you see the bombers decloak, you can't make them move faster, you can't make them zig or zag or do something to get out of the bombs' AoE, all you are left to do is sit there and tab over to your indy alt to start scrounging up some replacements as you watch your current flight disappear into the ether. Multiply occurrences like that by it happening 2-3 times a week during a burn+grind campaign and maybe, just maybe you might start to get a sense of how stupid that whole situation is.
again, how is this different?
if it is too expansive for you to loose several flight of fibos a week, then just stop flying your super, that's all......
i like how every super pilote bash ppl in very similar situations telling them to "fly only what you can afford", "htfu" and stuff, while they, in fact, whine exactly the same.
you are no special snowflake because you fly a 20B ship you know, same rule for everyone, deal with it
ps: nyx pilot here, just sayin, so i see exactly what you mean |
tsiliadora
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:41:00 -
[432] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: However it's much less of a buff than you seem to think it is because the vast majority of Supercarrier use is in situations where they can refit at will, allowing clever pilots to switch between high tank and high damage fits as needed.
ok now explain me how this is gonna work in heavy tidi or heavy bumb ??? and ok i accept that is a buff to wyvern, but why at the same time you make so heavy nerf to nyx???
after that it gonna be worst even that hel !!! (in statistics)
and dont make me talk sbout what is gonna happen to the prices of that ship ( imagine 300-400 ppl try to sell their nyx and buy an aeon /wyvern )
the only way to keep them in balance with these changes is also to change the bonus (from 5% to 10%)
and you have all the sc's in a line ( tank-dps) .
|
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1717
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:42:00 -
[433] - Quote
penifSMASH wrote:Ammzi wrote:Drak Fel wrote:
It should take multiple waves. Do you know how frustrating it is to save up 30 billion isk for what is supposed to be one of the most powerful ships in the game just to have some guy with isboxer, or a handful of guys, come along in several 25 million isk ships, drop a few bombs and leave you with no way to apply any DPS whatsoever?
I might have 99 problems in EVE, but earning isk is not one of them. I'm sorry you feel that way. Here, let's have Rise solve that problem for you. PS: Isn't that the same arguments freighters use? "It's not fair I spend over 1b on this ship, how come a handful of 10m isk ships can kill me?" God forbid stealth bombers have to be a little coordinated after the patch in order to completely neuter a trillion isk fleet
Implying you could do the same with little to no effort. God forbid supers have to be a little coordinated to avoid losing their fighter bombers. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2534
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:44:00 -
[434] - Quote
Nira Meru wrote:Rikard Nomm wrote:Nira Meru wrote:Rikard Nomm wrote:did i miss it completely, or has there been no mention of what Racial Drone Spec level will be required to use T2 sentries? will it be Racial Spec IV like the heavies? That seems to make the most sense given they both use the same bandwidth therefore are the same "size" weapon system.
Some confirmation would be neat tho. Sentries require no racial now i don't know why the would in the future, sentry drone interfacing skill is pretty high level skill to need. quoted from dev blog, see text i put in bold: Quote:For quality levels, Tech Two sentry drones are currently massive upgrades over their Tech One equivalents since range, tracking and damage are all such important attributes for sentries. We will be keeping the 20% bonuses to hitpoints, tracking, optimal, and falloff that Tech Two enjoys over Tech One; but instead of the current 20% increase in damage over T1, we will be increasing the base damage multiplier of Tech One sentries and limiting the Tech Two advantage to the 2% per level gained from the racial Drone Specialization skills that will now be required to use T2 sentries. So it's a massive F you to every sentry pilot who doesn't have heavies... no seriosuly why would i ever use sentries over heavies again?
Because in a PvE environment, heavies can't be used because the AI implemented to enhance "the player experience" 2 years ago chews them to pieces in seconds. So the next step, after people are forced to use sentries, is to wreck them, with the Omni demolition, and now this. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Drak Fel
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
42
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:47:00 -
[435] - Quote
Ammzi wrote:penifSMASH wrote:Ammzi wrote:Drak Fel wrote:
It should take multiple waves. Do you know how frustrating it is to save up 30 billion isk for what is supposed to be one of the most powerful ships in the game just to have some guy with isboxer, or a handful of guys, come along in several 25 million isk ships, drop a few bombs and leave you with no way to apply any DPS whatsoever?
I might have 99 problems in EVE, but earning isk is not one of them. I'm sorry you feel that way. Here, let's have Rise solve that problem for you. PS: Isn't that the same arguments freighters use? "It's not fair I spend over 1b on this ship, how come a handful of 10m isk ships can kill me?" God forbid stealth bombers have to be a little coordinated after the patch in order to completely neuter a trillion isk fleet Implying you could do the same with little to no effort. God forbid supers have to be a little coordinated to avoid losing their fighter bombers.
If they die to one wave of bombs (like they do now), there's literally nothing you can do. Making it take two waves means you have a chance to keep them alive if you actively try to save them. |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
458
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:48:00 -
[436] - Quote
Drak Fel wrote:seth Hendar wrote:Drak Fel wrote:Ammzi wrote:Drak Fel wrote:
Seriously? You're mad because it will take one guy running several cheap bombers with isboxer more than one bombing run to make a 30 billion plus isk ship defenseless?
Implying it's easy to bomb fighterbombers in that short timeframe they MWD considering just 10 seconds is spent on bomb travel. And more than one run won't cut it, because they'll just be repped up now. There's only 10 fighter bombers, so you only have to top up those 10's armor in the 2 min. for the bomb launch timer cycle. You don't need two runs, you need two waves and that just makes things 10 times as difficult and even if it succeeds only those fighter bombers in the overlap will die and that overlap is much smaller than the current 30 km radius. And if they don't MWD it'll take 4 overlapping waves which is basically battleship durability. (generic comment about not being mad, but wondering if Rise considered this, because it doesn't scale properly with bombs.) It should take multiple waves. Do you know how frustrating it is to save up 30-35 billion isk for what is supposed to be one of the most powerful ships in the game just to have some guy with isboxer, or a handful of guys, come along in several 25 million isk ships, drop a few bombs and leave you with no way to apply any DPS whatsoever? htfu. it is the same feeling than being blaped flying a 3-4B macha / vindi by a isboxer kevin boxing 10 nados, yet the only answer we have, from both CCP and plaers, is HTFU, so HTFU, why should it be different in this case? because you fly a giant carrier? you don't even loose the thing in your described scenario! I'm not saying it should be impossible, but requiring more than one wave of bombs to do it seems reasonable.
well dont pull in your FB's everytime you see bombs in the air. FB's are more durable taking the damage with their mwd's off then after the wave to pull them in to rep with your cap armor reppers etc...
currently it takes between 14 and 17 bombs to kill a FB dependent on skills. with the HP increase it puts that at 28-34 bombs, which to even an experienced bomber FC is a much harder task to do especially in a time constraint. its also much rarer to see a bomber fleet with more than 3 squads, meaning to kill FB's after the HP buff means it'll take upwards of 2+ minutes to do.
A Supercarrier pilot will have to literally be afk to loose FB's before pulling them in and/or repping them back to full health.
|
stoicfaux
4359
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:48:00 -
[437] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: We are hearing the feedback from those of you who argue that this change doesn't go far enough to make the Caldari and Amarr drones competitive. It is too soon to announce anything else yet but we're taking this feedback to heart. [/list] What about letting the guinea pigs (players) figure it out by providing them with multiple versions of each racial drone? For example, provide artillery and autocannon versions of Minmatar drones, which would let players figure out whether longer ranged, lower tracking, high alpha drones are more useful than short-ranged, high tracking, fast cycling drones.
I'm pretty sure that Wardens/Wasps that come in railgun and blaster variants would be interesting.
WASABI: Warp Acceleration System Ancillary Boost Injected(Gäó)
|
DrunkenOne
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
12
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:49:00 -
[438] - Quote
Most of what I see seems reasonable but I have to ask for some love for Revenants. At this point the ship is at best the worst super carrier. The advantage of only have to use 10 fb's will be gone. The ship is the most expensive ship in game at this point and is nothing more than a rich mans toy with no reason to put it on the field.
D1 |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20423
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:51:00 -
[439] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Because in a PvE environment, heavies can't be used because the AI implemented to enhance "the player experience" 2 years ago chews them to pieces in seconds. GǪexcept that the AI implementation had nothing to do with that (and it didn't happen two years ago either). Sentries were always the better choice for PvE due to their higher damage and far better damage projection.
Nira Meru wrote:So it's a massive F you to every sentry pilot who doesn't have heavies... no seriosuly why would i ever use sentries over heavies again? For much the same reasons as before: damage projection and ease of use. They will no longer also have higher damage, but that is a good thing. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Drak Fel
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
42
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:52:00 -
[440] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote: well dont pull in your FB's everytime you see bombs in the air. FB's are more durable taking the damage with their mwd's off then after the wave to pull them in to rep with your cap armor reppers etc...
currently it takes between 14 and 17 bombs to kill a FB dependent on skills. with the HP increase it puts that at 28-34 bombs, which to even an experienced bomber FC is a much harder task to do especially in a time constraint. its also much rarer to see a bomber fleet with more than 3 squads, meaning to kill FB's after the HP buff means it'll take upwards of 2+ minutes to do.
A Supercarrier pilot will have to literally be afk to loose FB's before pulling them in and/or repping them back to full health.
Halfway descent bomber pilots wait until the structure is reinforced/dead and supers start to pull bombers in to bomb (actually if it died they return whether or not you told them to) and it currently does not take that many bombs to kill them I assure you.
Also, who doesn't AFK while grinding in their super? Do you know how boring that **** is? lol |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
595
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:53:00 -
[441] - Quote
nullbabbies please go |
Nira Meru
Codename-47 Chained Reactions
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:54:00 -
[442] - Quote
[quote/]Because in a PvE environment, heavies can't be used because the AI implemented to enhance "the player experience" 2 years ago chews them to pieces in seconds. So the next step, after people are forced to use sentries, is to wreck them, with the Omni demolition, and now this.[/quote]
Sorry was talking PVP there. I granted this pve buffed sentries exspecially Curators in place like sansha region and Drone region where u want to do em damage, they will be amazing in those regions but, i was focused on pvp here. |
Nira Meru
Codename-47 Chained Reactions
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:57:00 -
[443] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Because in a PvE environment, heavies can't be used because the AI implemented to enhance "the player experience" 2 years ago chews them to pieces in seconds. GǪexcept that the AI implementation had nothing to do with that (and it didn't happen two years ago either). Sentries were always the better choice for PvE due to their higher damage and far better damage projection. Nira Meru wrote:So it's a massive F you to every sentry pilot who doesn't have heavies... no seriosuly why would i ever use sentries over heavies again? For much the same reasons as before: damage projection and ease of use. They will no longer also have higher damage, but that is a good thing.
they didnt have higher damage in the past ogre II highest damage in the game <3 was still talking battle ship pvp. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
2064
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:59:00 -
[444] - Quote
[Ogre II - Fit it Yourself]
High
[Empty]
Mid
[Empty]
Low
[Drone Damage Amplifier II ] [Drone Damage Amplifier II]] [Overdrive Injector System II]
Wouldn't that be cool :) Wishful thinking but would be sweet to customize your drones from the inside of the drone rather than the ship itself.
Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Nira Meru
Codename-47 Chained Reactions
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:59:00 -
[445] - Quote
Dev Blog: Giving Drones an Assist ?
With devs like this who needs an assist geeze. |
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1717
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 16:00:00 -
[446] - Quote
Drak Fel wrote:
Halfway descent bomber pilots wait until the structure is reinforced/dead and supers start to pull bombers in to bomb (actually if it died they return whether or not you told them to) and it currently does not take that many bombs to kill them I assure you.
Also, who doesn't AFK while grinding in their super? Do you know how boring that **** is? lol
> wants to not lose dps while going afk.
Sov structures such as stations and ihubs have a massive radius, so when your fighter bombers return they are not clustered together neatly. So there goes that argument. For sbus/tcus, if the supers are aligned and fleet warp the instant it dies the fighter bombers don't mwd. So there goes that argument too.
But you don't want to argue cons vs pros, you just want an easy "kill this structure with no effort while watching a movie" ship for 20-30 b isk. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2341
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 16:02:00 -
[447] - Quote
Sorry Fozzie this change sucks for anybody grinding structures, I'm 100% not 'doing it wrong', you're nerfing the supers DPS output and forcing them to tank less so putting them in more danger while increasing the weapon system risk because CCP refuses to do anything about ISBoxer since its feeding them subs, which amounts to every fight haviing 40+ bombers being ran by 6 guys (totally ok though right, i mean any kind of botting that feeds subs to our little icelandic company can't be all bad right?).
So try not to tell me I'm doing it wrong when you seem to have zero understanding of the current 0.0 meta.
Stop adjusting the things for how you think the game will be played and adjust it based on how its actually being played.
People are actually using ISboxer to death, and you are actually making the supercarriers more vulnerable to it. I guess the end result is supposed to be everybody grinding structures in bombers because you're seriously limiting the options on what people are willing to deal with as far as structure grinding goes.
Why can't you guys get that SOV sucks to deal with, you used to be players, how hard is it to just not screw with the things that allow us to limp through this terrible set of game mechanics without making it worse? Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
2064
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 16:05:00 -
[448] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Sorry Fozzie this change sucks for anybody grinding structures, I'm 100% not 'doing it wrong', you're nerfing the supers DPS output and forcing them to tank less so putting them in more danger while increasing the weapon system risk because CCP refuses to do anything about ISBoxer since its feeding them subs, which amounts to every fight haviing 40+ bombers being ran by 6 guys (totally ok though right, i mean any kind of botting that feeds subs to our little icelandic company can't be all bad right?).
So try not to tell me I'm doing it wrong when you seem to have zero understanding of the current 0.0 meta.
Stop adjusting the things for how you think the game will be played and adjust it based on how its actually being played.
People are actually using ISboxer to death, and you are actually making the supercarriers more vulnerable to it. I guess the end result is supposed to be everybody grinding structures in bombers because you're seriously limiting the options on what people are willing to deal with as far as structure grinding goes.
Why can't you guys get that SOV sucks to deal with, you used to be players, how hard is it to just not screw with the things that allow us to limp through this terrible set of game mechanics without making it worse? Thats a bad thing? Nope its a good thing. If you don't like risk you're playing the wrong game. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
595
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 16:05:00 -
[449] - Quote
oh god, supers in danger |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20423
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 16:05:00 -
[450] - Quote
Nira Meru wrote:they didnt have higher damage in the past ogre II highest damage in the game <3 was still talking battle ship pvp. They had higher damage before we got DDAs that let other drones boost past them (which happened after the change that dinny is confused about), and their main benefit after that change GÇö projection GÇö is stil as around and as beneficial as ever. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 35 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |