| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 50 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Honky Lips
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
2
   |
Posted - 2015.03.11 07:43:45 -
[1141] - Quote
drone assist is bad mkey |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
871
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 08:27:36 -
[1142] - Quote
I can't believe you guys are still arguing about damage amounts. The damage they deal isn't the problem. It's the risk averse chump tactics at the edge of a pos shield / pw entry screen open / on the station undock that are the problem. It's not that they can be delegated, it's that they can be delegated from risk averse chump safety. The lame mechanic is the ability to nose back into the pos, NOT that fighters are delagated.
Make the delegating ship actually enter the field of combat in some manner and delegating fighters is just fine.
Drone assist is also fine.
Sentry assist is broken due to instant dps and no need for drone travel time.
It's risk averse chump tactics (pos/docking games) and deliberate pre-meditated player induced server and soul crushing lag (sentries) that are the problem. There is NO DPS ISSUE here.
Focus laddies! |
Nolak Ataru
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
768
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 09:12:19 -
[1143] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:I can't believe you guys are still arguing about damage amounts. The damage they deal isn't the problem. It's the risk averse chump tactics at the edge of a pos shield / pw entry screen open / on the station undock that are the problem. It's not that they can be delegated, it's that they can be delegated from risk averse chump safety. The lame mechanic is the ability to nose back into the pos, NOT that fighters are delagated.
1) If they force a POS shield up, that's a win.
1.5) If the super is forced to run, that's a win.
2) If their fighters aggress, they cannot dock, leaving them vulnerable.
3) You still haven't talked about the idea of a bubble around a POS that disallows delegated fighters.
4) The Revenant really
Quote:Sentry assist is broken due to instant dps and no need for drone travel time.
What is drone tracking and optimal for 500, Alex? As a fleet engages at longer ranges, tracking starts to affect a given weapon system less and less, and DPS drops off, so you need more people.
Quote:It's risk averse chump tactics (pos/docking games) and deliberate pre-meditated player induced server and soul crushing lag (sentries) that are the problem. There is NO DPS ISSUE here.
If you think a player, corp, or alliance has purposefully induced server lag, there's a report function. |
Altayr555
Enter Ice
La Division Bleue
6
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 11:40:50 -
[1144] - Quote
+1 for warp fighter
and a micro jump drive for capital..... |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
949
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 11:56:56 -
[1145] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:
If anyone's been picking at technicalities, it's you. I'm just trying to make sure your math is up to speed with the realities of EFT/PYFA, however those examples we've discussed were very uncommon. For example, for the Revenant to achieve the maximum speed of it's Fighters we mentioned, it would need the top officer modules available in EVE Online, which, according to PYFA, go for 20b in Jita. If a single purple module on a battleship warrants it getting ganked in Niarja, imagine what sort of attention a ship-full will grab? If, for example, we have a minimum of, say, 50km where caps cannot assist fighters, that leaves a nice margin of error for a ship to get bubbled. Additionally, if supers now use "uber safe spots zomg", and you force them to panic warp to a POS, that's mission success, much the same way that Jita duelers / station gamers call it a victory of they force someone else to de-aggress and dock, or to pull out their Nestor and panic-rep.
As I said I was generalising (if you look back through the thread I've multiple times expounded on the various capabilities - getting a bit tired of repeating the same replies as this thread is basically the same 10 pages over and over again with the same stuff brought up) - 9+km/s is the top end of what you can manage with a fit that will blap interceptors with ease as fitted on a revenant (its still a super) sure its a little lower on regular carriers/supers my point was its possible to make one way or another fighters that are fast enough to chase down (and track) all but the most extreme interceptor setups never mind stuff like cruisers and that IMO is out of balance regardless of whether there is risk to the parent carrier or not.
I've been asking for a minimum distance for fighter delegation from POSes since before this thread even existed infact I believe I was the first person to even post such https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5503882#post5503882 and https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5530584#post5530584 etc. |
Kabantik
Accidentally Seriously
Accidentally The Whole Thing
12
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 12:21:06 -
[1146] - Quote
I've been glossing over as many Game Developer, ISD and CSM posts as I can as well as looking at some of the better written forum posts throughout the entirety of the thread and I must say:
Ultimately I am greatly disappointed with the decision to remove carrier and super carrier fighter assistance from the game.
Of course I had my own rational reasons to disagree with this game-play change which of course doesn't outweigh anyone else's opinions or statements; what bothers me though is that the issue is once again splitting the community in a roughly 50/50 manner. There were some outright rejections of the proposal and welcoming acceptance from some. What I took from most of the posts is that there is a discrepancy between whether this is a black and white issue or a more complicated gray area. Based on how split the community was I would have preferred that the developers would step back from the mechanic and at least wait until other aspects of the game were changed (sentries, T3s, upcoming super secret Jovian tech I think at least, don't quote me bro ) before trying to remove features that may alter the game play of lowsec/nullsec capital engagements. There were many suggestions and alternatives that were proposed and even though they weren't perfect, it showed that the EVE community was prepared to cooperatively work with CCP to find a reasonable and feasible solution over time, even if it meant delaying the fighter changes to the next expansion after Scylla.
I would like to see us all take a look back at the history of carriers and fighter deployment over the past 2 sovereignty systems and look forward to the upcoming sovereignty systems and fully evaluate what content we may be losing by removing features. I don't want to write a novel but a few examples: we are going to see less carriers being used as long distance support in systems players work tirelessly to defend (consider the investment, towers, bubbles, fighter costs, possible carrier losses). We are going to see less combat carriers on the field now that titans can liberally doomsday in low-sec (which is a fine trade off for using LS/NS stargates anyways) and therefore less targets, weaker sub cap defense fleets for smaller entities. Again, I can't write a novel but those are some examples. I can see the issue of starbase shield security and saying that carriers are relatively safe but realistically, you're a bump away from losing your delegation fit carrier.
Of course I have more examples and some psuedo solutions but that's no longer the issue.
Anyways, it is my sincerest request that we hold off on changing fighter delegation for another patch so that we can come up with a true solution to re balancing capital ships in the long run.
If you agree with what I say, please just quote me, hopefully we can stop this from happening too soon, just remember the ultimate rule of rebalancing: once a feature is removed, it may never return. Alternatively you can EVE mail me in game to give me your two cents as I'm curious as to what most players truly have to say about the change.
Thank you for reading as always. Fly Safe o7
|
Nolak Ataru
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
770
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 17:25:46 -
[1147] - Quote
Rroff wrote:As I said I was generalising (if you look back through the thread I've multiple times expounded on the various capabilities - getting a bit tired of repeating the same replies as this thread is basically the same 10 pages over and over again with the same stuff brought up) - 9+km/s is the top end of what you can manage with a fit that will blap interceptors with ease as fitted on a revenant (its still a super) sure its a little lower on regular carriers/supers my point was its possible to make one way or another fighters that are fast enough to chase down (and track) all but the most extreme interceptor setups never mind stuff like cruisers and that IMO is out of balance regardless of whether there is risk to the parent carrier or not. I've been asking for a minimum distance for fighter delegation from POSes since before this thread even existed infact I believe I was the first person to even post such https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5503882#post5503882 and https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5530584#post5530584 etc.
9km will get you plenty of speed, plenty of damage, but ****-poor tracking, so a single slingshot maneuver means you're free. You keep spouting false facts in an attempt to spread misinformation in a misguided attempt to destroy more capitals, but this is not the way to do it. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa
Stark Enterprises
2802
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 20:14:29 -
[1148] - Quote
Fire rise. For bad game design reasons.
No data needed.
Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
|
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
949
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 20:46:57 -
[1149] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:
9km will get you plenty of speed, plenty of damage, but ****-poor tracking, so a single slingshot maneuver means you're free. You keep spouting false facts in an attempt to spread misinformation in a misguided attempt to destroy more capitals, but this is not the way to do it.
Not that I'd recommend the fit and lol stacking penalties... but 9km/s, 0.877 rad/s tracking and plenty of choice of mixed range and tracking as required (and not an officer mod in sight).
Quote:
[Revenant, uhumyeah]
Federation Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
Federation Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
Federation Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
Federation Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
Dread Guristas Omnidirectional Tracking Enhancer
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Omnidirectional Tracking Link II, Tracking Speed Script
Omnidirectional Tracking Link II, Tracking Speed Script
Sentient Drone Navigation Computer
Sentient Drone Navigation Computer
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
Capital Drone Speed Augmentor II
Capital Drone Speed Augmentor II
Capital Drone Speed Augmentor II
Einherji x1
I have 0 interest in seeing capitals destroyed - I have multiple carrier V, fighters V, ADI V, etc. characters - my main interest is in seeing a balanced outcome - I can also see the practical realities of the issue from the perspective of those who like to do more casual roaming. |
Nolak Ataru
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
773
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 21:22:42 -
[1150] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:
9km will get you plenty of speed, plenty of damage, but ****-poor tracking, so a single slingshot maneuver means you're free. You keep spouting false facts in an attempt to spread misinformation in a misguided attempt to destroy more capitals, but this is not the way to do it.
Not that I'd recommend the fit and lol stacking penalties... but 9km/s, 0.877 rad/s tracking and plenty of choice of mixed range and tracking as required (and not an officer mod in sight).
[Revenant, uhumyeah]
Federation Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
Federation Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
Federation Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
Federation Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
Dread Guristas Omnidirectional Tracking Enhancer
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Omnidirectional Tracking Link II, Tracking Speed Script
Omnidirectional Tracking Link II, Tracking Speed Script
Sentient Drone Navigation Computer
Sentient Drone Navigation Computer
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
Capital Drone Speed Augmentor II
Capital Drone Speed Augmentor II
Capital Drone Speed Augmentor II
Einherji x1
I have 0 interest in seeing capitals destroyed - I have multiple carrier V, fighters V, ADI V, etc. characters - my main interest is in seeing a balanced outcome - I can also see the practical realities of the issue from the perspective of those who like to do more casual roaming.
First off, nobody in their right mind would put those rigs onto a supercarrier, let alone a Revenant. Second of all, you have 2.8m EHP without Slaves, which means a single Titan and a single dread and you're the proud owner of an all new ALOD. Third of all, nobody would dare fit that sort of supercarrier if they were 50km from a POS, or if they were in some mystical deep safe in system, because Murphy can and will make an entrance, and you can bet your bottom dollar that someone can be persuaded to hand out the PW of a POS that holds a Revenant. As I mentioned before, the sheer rarity of this ship adds some balance to it's power, much like Guardian-Vexors with their 10-drone control are balanced by the fact there's, what, two or three left in the game. |
|
|
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
949
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 21:32:00 -
[1151] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:
First off, nobody in their right mind would put those rigs onto a supercarrier, let alone a Revenant. Second of all, you have 2.8m EHP without Slaves, which means a single Titan and a single dread and you're the proud owner of an all new ALOD. Third of all, nobody would dare fit that sort of supercarrier if they were 50km from a POS, or if they were in some mystical deep safe in system, because Murphy can and will make an entrance, and you can bet your bottom dollar that someone can be persuaded to hand out the PW of a POS that holds a Revenant. As I mentioned before, the sheer rarity of this ship adds some balance to it's power, much like Guardian-Vexors with their 10-drone control are balanced by the fact there's, what, two or three left in the game.
If your fit for skynet doesn't really make much odds what rigs you have on there - and if your in a position to refit then you can change rigs to - my comments are mostly intended with the scope of how things are now - if there were restriction in place around POSes so that you could only delegate from 50+km away then it would be a different story.
In the context (purely) of skynet (partly thanks to one person's prolific use) the revenant isn't so much a rarity and while those stats are taking things towards the absurd end of the scale you can still amp fighters up to some pretty scary capabilities generally even with the other supers and normal carriers. |
Nolak Ataru
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
773
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 22:12:20 -
[1152] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:
First off, nobody in their right mind would put those rigs onto a supercarrier, let alone a Revenant. Second of all, you have 2.8m EHP without Slaves, which means a single Titan and a single dread and you're the proud owner of an all new ALOD. Third of all, nobody would dare fit that sort of supercarrier if they were 50km from a POS, or if they were in some mystical deep safe in system, because Murphy can and will make an entrance, and you can bet your bottom dollar that someone can be persuaded to hand out the PW of a POS that holds a Revenant. As I mentioned before, the sheer rarity of this ship adds some balance to it's power, much like Guardian-Vexors with their 10-drone control are balanced by the fact there's, what, two or three left in the game.
If your fit for skynet doesn't really make much odds what rigs you have on there - and if your in a position to refit then you can change rigs to - my comments are mostly intended with the scope of how things are now - if there were restriction in place around POSes so that you could only delegate from 50+km away then it would be a different story. In the context (purely) of skynet (partly thanks to one person's prolific use) the revenant isn't so much a rarity and while those stats are taking things towards the absurd end of the scale you can still amp fighters up to some pretty scary capabilities generally even with the other supers and normal carriers.
It *wouldn't* make much difference if normal supercapital rigs weren't tank rigs, but since they are, you're missing a lot of tank.
In terms of absolute rarity, the Rev *is* rare. Just because the player sent it to a camped system, assigned fighters, and stepped out for an afternoon coffee does not make it a problem.
And yes, while you can pimp up drone damage with other carriers and supercaps, the fact of the matter still remains that in order to get "uber 1337" fighters, you must remove something known as "tank" which prevents PL or whoever is your enemy from making an unannounced house-call with a steamroller. That's a balancing factor that I believe is a very powerful incentive against assisting fighters. |
BLACK METALL
Tauron Heavy industry
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
24
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 07:34:06 -
[1153] - Quote
You and so cut Superkapitalnye ships to horror, then remove them from the game at all.  |
C4nobaby
Core of Elements
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 08:09:53 -
[1154] - Quote
You nerv Supers useless for small Corporations and small Alliances.
Stop nerv them or remove them finally from the game. |
Anarkio Mahyisti
Tauron Heavy industry
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 08:31:34 -
[1155] - Quote
Stop nerv |
Milo Boirelle
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 08:38:36 -
[1156] - Quote
HELL NO WE WONT GO! KEEP FIGHTERS ASSIST! |
Begpo Bogku
Tauron Heavy industry
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 08:47:45 -
[1157] - Quote
Ya protestuyu! >:o |
Izanagi Alexandra
Combat Matous Fleet
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 09:07:41 -
[1158] - Quote
This class of drones will lose your chip (unique class), then it makes no sense to use expensive drones and build them, throw full hold T1 or T2 drones, and forget about the fighters. I am personally against it.
-ö-¦-+-+-ï-¦ -¦-+-¦-ü-ü -¦-Ç-+-+-+-¦ -é-¦-Ç-Å-¦-é -ü-¦-+-Ä -ä-+-ê-¦-â (-â-+-+-¦-¦-+-î-+-+-ü-é-î -¦-+-¦-ü-ü-¦), -é-+-¦-¦-¦ -ü-+-ï-ü-+-¦ -+-¦-é -+-ü-+-+-+-î-+-+-¦-¦-é-î -¦-+-Ç-+-¦-+-ü-é-+-Å-ë-+-¦ -¦-Ç-+-+-ï -+ -ü-é-Ç-+-+-é-î -+-à, -+-¦-¦-+-+-â-é-î -+-+-+-+-ï-¦ -é-Ç-Ä-+ -é1 -+-+-+ -é2 -¦-Ç-+-+-+-¦, -+ -+-¦-¦-ï-é-î -+ -ä-¦-¦-é-¦-Ç-¦-à. -» -+-+-ç-+-+ -+-Ç-+-é-+-¦. |
BlacAngel Aurilen
the Black Sun Cartel
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
7
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 09:18:48 -
[1159] - Quote
I am personally against it |
Elissa Antollare
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 09:19:22 -
[1160] - Quote
BLACK METALL wrote:You and so cut Superkapitalnye ships to horror, then remove them from the game at all.
If you are going to nerf figher assist to make Supercapitals be on-field ships, remove Supercapitals from the game altogether. They are too big, slow, expensive and take too long to build for any small to medium sized corporation to be able to risk losing them. Don't bother nerfing fighter assist unless you plan to remove supercapitals from the game, they are already a big enough target as is. Finally, stop breaking Sovereignty and Supercapitals and start fixing Jove space and these new tactical destroyers. |
|
|
Still Related
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 09:24:37 -
[1161] - Quote
I hope they make fighter assist to capital only ships, this makes still viable to be used but not making it too op that ceptors "solo" battleships. |
BlackyJacky
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 11:34:07 -
[1162] - Quote
whow how to wreck a class of ship completely, its like you don't even like null, or small corps or those trying to survive in the wilds. might as well stop construction and head to empire..or low..low is safer.
Cheers CCP yet another reason to stop having one of those pilot coffins |
Aivlis Eldelbar
Ubuntu Inc.
The Fourth District
57
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 12:12:26 -
[1163] - Quote
Oh wow, look at this posting CTA we have here! Shadow of xXDEATHXx must be monitoring that all pilots post at least once XD
Fighter assist is broken because it allows a virtually invulnerable carrier to delegate huge amounts of dps to anyone in system, and the fighters can't even be pointed and killed, they just teleport back to the Thanatos at the edge of his pos shield.
While I would prefer that this was solved by forcing carriers to be X km away from a forcefield or station before they can assist their fighters, the current mechanics are toxic for the game and must be fixed. |
AlexandrBK
Combat Matous Fleet
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 14:30:33 -
[1164] - Quote
-» -¦-¦-¦-+-+ -+-¦-Ç-¦-Ä -¦ -ì-é-â -+-¦-Ç-â, -+ -+-+-ü-é-+-Å-+-+-+ -+-¦-¦-+-Ä-¦-¦-Ä -¦-Ç-+-¦ -+-¦-¦-+-¦-+-+-î-ü-é-¦-¦ -+-+ -+-é-+-+-ê-¦-+-+-Ä -¦ -ü-â-+-¦-Ç--¦-¦-+-+-é-¦-+-¦-+, -¦ -ç-¦-ü-é-+-+-ü-é-+ -¦ -+-+-ü-+-é-¦-+-Å-+ -¦-Ç-+-+-+-¦. -ú -+-¦-+-Å -ü-¦-+-¦-¦-ï-¦-¦-¦-é-ü-Å -+-+-¦-+-+-¦, -ç-é-+ -+-+-+-¦-+-¦ -+-¦-Ç-+-¦-+ -+-Ç-+-ü-é-+ -+-¦ -à-+-é-Å-é -é-Ç-¦-é-+-é-î -¦-Ç-¦-+-Å -+ -â-ç-+-é-î -ì-é-+ -¦-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-+, -é-Ç-¦-é-+-é-î -¦-¦-+-î-¦-+ -+-¦ -+-+-¦-â-+-¦-â -¦-+-+-¦ -+-¦-¦-ï-¦-+-¦, -+-+ -+-¦-+-î, -+-+-+ -¦-¦-¦-î -+-à-+-é-+-+-¦-+ -+-¦-+-+-+-ç-¦-+, -+ -+-+ -é-¦-¦-+-¦ -¦-+-+-+-+-¦-+-+-ü-é-+ -+-¦-Ç-ï -+-+-+-+-ê-+-+, -¦-+-ü-é-¦-é-+-ç-+-+ T3 -¦-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-Å -+ -¦-ü-æ, -+-â -+ -+-¦-+-+-ü-é-î -+-¦-+-+-ç-+ -ä-Ç-+-¦-¦-é-+-+-¦. -á-¦-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-é-ç-+-¦-+, -¦-ü-+-+ -¦-¦-+ -+-¦ -+-+-é-¦-Ç-¦-ü-+-¦ -¦-+-+-¦-ë-¦ -¦-+-+-å-¦-+-å-+-Å -¦-¦-+-+ -Ç-¦-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-é-¦-+-+-+-¦-+ -+-Ç-+-¦-â-¦-é-¦ -+ -¦-ï -à-+-é-+-é-¦ -ü-¦-¦-é-+-é-î-ü-Å -¦ -¦-é-+-Ç-+-ü-+-Ç-é-+-+-+-â -ê-â-é-¦-Ç-â -+-¦ -+-ü-é-Ç-+-¦-+-é-¦-+-Å-à, -é-+ -¦-¦-+-¦-¦-é-¦ -ç-é-+ -à-+-é-+-é-¦, -+-+ -¦-+-+ -+-¦-Ç-+-+-+-ï-à -¦-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-¦-¦ -¦ EVE Online -â-¦-¦ -+-Ç-¦-¦-é-+-ç-¦-ü-¦-+ -+-+-ä, -¦-ï -ü-+-+-ê-¦-+-+ -+-ü-+-¦-¦-+-+-+ -¦-¦-ü-î -¦-¦-+-+-é-¦-+-î-+-ï-¦ -ä-+-+-é, -+-+ -â-¦-¦ -+-¦ -¦-¦-é-â-¦-+-¦-+, -¦ -¦-¦-+-î-ê-¦ -ü-¦-+-+-+-+ -¦-+-¦-ê-¦-é-¦-+-î-ü-é-¦-¦-+-+ -¦-ï -ü-+-¦-ü-¦-+ -â-¦-î-æ-é-¦ -+-à, -¦-ü-¦-¦-+ -à-+-Ç-+-ê-¦-¦-+ -¦-¦-+ -¦ -¦-¦-ê-¦-+ -é-¦-+-Ç-ç-¦-ü-é-¦-¦. |
MrRIN5
Tauron Heavy industry
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 14:50:47 -
[1165] - Quote
I protest against - Removing Fighter Assist |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
949
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 15:13:03 -
[1166] - Quote
Aivlis Eldelbar wrote:Oh wow, look at this posting CTA we have here! Shadow of xXDEATHXx must be monitoring that all pilots post at least once XD
I had to smile when I refreshed the thread and saw the CTA style posting lol.
Thing is this change does impact a lot deeper than skynet type use (which most people will agree is broken - even those who want fighter assignment to stay like myself). |
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1503
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 15:57:06 -
[1167] - Quote
AlexandrBK wrote:-» -¦-¦-¦-+-+ -+-¦-Ç-¦-Ä -¦ -ì-é-â -+-¦-Ç-â, -+ -+-+-ü-é-+-Å-+-+-+ -+-¦-¦-+-Ä-¦-¦-Ä -¦-Ç-+-¦ -+-¦-¦-+-¦-+-+-î-ü-é-¦-¦ -+-+ -+-é-+-+-ê-¦-+-+-Ä -¦ -ü-â-+-¦-Ç--¦-¦-+-+-é-¦-+-¦-+, -¦ -ç-¦-ü-é-+-+-ü-é-+ -¦ -+-+-ü-+-é-¦-+-Å-+ -¦-Ç-+-+-+-¦. -ú -+-¦-+-Å -ü-¦-+-¦-¦-ï-¦-¦-¦-é-ü-Å -+-+-¦-+-+-¦, -ç-é-+ -+-+-+-¦-+-¦ -+-¦-Ç-+-¦-+ -+-Ç-+-ü-é-+ -+-¦ -à-+-é-Å-é -é-Ç-¦-é-+-é-î -¦-Ç-¦-+-Å -+ -â-ç-+-é-î -ì-é-+ -¦-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-+, -é-Ç-¦-é-+-é-î -¦-¦-+-î-¦-+ -+-¦ -+-+-¦-â-+-¦-â -¦-+-+-¦ -+-¦-¦-ï-¦-+-¦, -+-+ -+-¦-+-î, -+-+-+ -¦-¦-¦-î -+-à-+-é-+-+-¦-+ -+-¦-+-+-+-ç-¦-+, -+ -+-+ -é-¦-¦-+-¦ -¦-+-+-+-+-¦-+-+-ü-é-+ -+-¦-Ç-ï -+-+-+-+-ê-+-+, -¦-+-ü-é-¦-é-+-ç-+-+ T3 -¦-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-Å -+ -¦-ü-æ, -+-â -+ -+-¦-+-+-ü-é-î -+-¦-+-+-ç-+ -ä-Ç-+-¦-¦-é-+-+-¦. -á-¦-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-é-ç-+-¦-+, -¦-ü-+-+ -¦-¦-+ -+-¦ -+-+-é-¦-Ç-¦-ü-+-¦ -¦-+-+-¦-ë-¦ -¦-+-+-å-¦-+-å-+-Å -¦-¦-+-+ -Ç-¦-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-é-¦-+-+-+-¦-+ -+-Ç-+-¦-â-¦-é-¦ -+ -¦-ï -à-+-é-+-é-¦ -ü-¦-¦-é-+-é-î-ü-Å -¦ -¦-é-+-Ç-+-ü-+-Ç-é-+-+-+-â -ê-â-é-¦-Ç-â -+-¦ -+-ü-é-Ç-+-¦-+-é-¦-+-Å-à, -é-+ -¦-¦-+-¦-¦-é-¦ -ç-é-+ -à-+-é-+-é-¦, -+-+ -¦-+-+ -+-¦-Ç-+-+-+-ï-à -¦-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-¦-¦ -¦ EVE Online -â-¦-¦ -+-Ç-¦-¦-é-+-ç-¦-ü-¦-+ -+-+-ä, -¦-ï -ü-+-+-ê-¦-+-+ -+-ü-+-¦-¦-+-+-+ -¦-¦-ü-î -¦-¦-+-+-é-¦-+-î-+-ï-¦ -ä-+-+-é, -+-+ -â-¦-¦ -+-¦ -¦-¦-é-â-¦-+-¦-+, -¦ -¦-¦-+-î-ê-¦ -ü-¦-+-+-+-+ -¦-+-¦-ê-¦-é-¦-+-î-ü-é-¦-¦-+-+ -¦-ï -ü-+-¦-ü-¦-+ -â-¦-î-æ-é-¦ -+-à, -¦-ü-¦-¦-+ -à-+-Ç-+-ê-¦-¦-+ -¦-¦-+ -¦ -¦-¦-ê-¦-+ -é-¦-+-Ç-ç-¦-ü-é-¦-¦.
Cleaned-up Google translation:
AlexandrBK wrote:I've been playing this game, and constantly watching the cry of discontent towards super-capitals, in particular to drones. I have the impression that many players just do not want to spend time training these ships, nor spend money to buy skill books. They are too lazy, because they are solitary hunters, and they have game features that are redundant enough: T3 ship and everything, well, and trivial little frigates. Developers, if you are not interested at all in the concept you developed for your product and you want to slide into second-class shooters on [missing word], then do whatever you want, but fighting a huge ship in EVE Online is almost a myth. You have weakened all major fleets too much. They are no longer relevant, and with your interventions you really kill them. All the best to you in your work.
Google Translate choked on "-+-ü-é-Ç-+-¦-+-é-¦-+-Å-à," and none of my attempts at guesses came close.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Aivlis Eldelbar
Ubuntu Inc.
The Fourth District
57
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 16:02:04 -
[1168] - Quote
Quote:Google Translate choked on "-+-ü-é-Ç-+-¦-+-é-¦-+-Å-à," and none of my attempts at guesses came close.
-+-ü-é-Ç-¦-¦-+-é-¦-+-î is the correct singular, meaning fighter :) |
Savant Alabel
Locus Signatures
30
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 16:29:17 -
[1169] - Quote
Yeah! Remove fighters assist! |
belliar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.12 16:34:52 -
[1170] - Quote
against removing fighter assist from carriers.
the why is because we players, we happy few, we band of brothers that are doing our thing in nullsec, dont *all have big alliances to rely on.
This game was made for all, theres no good solution, but a compromise. We players introduced renters so small groups of players could be introduced to nullsec. Not thanks to CCP.
We players introduced freightcontainer mining because we had too. A player solution is the best solution, its like nature u dont mess with the natural balance of things!
If CCP are the janitors then forcing us to swallow this nerf would be more like a puppet master trick. If this is the stick wheres the carrot?
Yes we are all looking forward of getting a 200 man roam gang showing up in our systems and no way to defend it, because we have been properly nerfed.. copyright ccp. /include emo icons.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 50 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |