EVE Search - DRONE BALANCE suggestion

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

DRONE BALANCE suggestion

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tryaz Improvised Tactics 95	Posted - 2015.03.24 01:46:58 - [31] - Quote Aeryn Maricadie wrote: Wait, wait, wait. You started this thread because you think Gallente drone boats need a buff? Because asking for the same dps with better application is a buff. If you don't like launching multiple drone types no one is stopping you from launching five hammerheads. You certainly can't just compare raw dps between drones and turrets like that, that's like apples to potatoes man. As far as drone balance in general, when there is a whole race of drone boats that is fairly well balanced, I don't think it is correct to say that drones are the problem because of an imbalance in another race or pirate faction ships. Thanks for your continued interest in the thread Aeryn. I put my point of interest about the size of Hammerhead flight needed to obtain 315dps in brackets for a reason: the reason being that it's a point of interest only and not the thrust of my argument. I agree with you that in the case of the Vexor to improve damage application without lowering damage would have to be labelled as a buff. I don't contend either that no one is stopping me from launching 5 Hammerhead IIs, many people do because of the gimpy application of the " " " "full damage" " " " flight. I just think that the design of hulls like the Vexor is inelegant and the OP is my suggestion for improving drones on all hulls. Again: I chose the Vexor as a case study, please don't think my entire idea is for the Vexor. Aeryn Maricadie wrote: Drone launch hotkey is needed too. +1 to this Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Tryaz Improvised Tactics 95	Posted - 2015.03.24 01:53:35 - [32] - Quote Rawketsled wrote: Give us an example where you choose 3x Ogre IIs. Nothing is currently stopping you from fitting that. And from my understanding, nothing will prevent you from doing so with channels. Except that 6.5 Medium Combat drones only requires 65m3 of bandwidth and so the Vexor's bandwidth would probably be reduced. (please?) 3 x Ogre IIs 285dps Signature Resolution: 400m Tracking: 0.54 rad/sec Optimal Range: 5250m+5000m Falloff I think you raise an important point though. Nothing IS stopping me, except that I'll always get better damage out of 5 drones than I will out of 3. JUST LIKE nothing is stopping me from using 3 Neutrons on the Thorax but I'll always get better damage out of 5 Electrons. Do you see my point? Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Aeryn Maricadie Periphery Bound 10	Posted - 2015.03.24 02:14:14 - [33] - Quote Medium drones do not need a buff, they trade less raw damage and the ability to overheat for the ability to project damage just as well from 55km as from 5km, they also have good application in general. They are balanced, the imbalances come from the Gallente ships that can fit far more drones than they ought to due to excessive bandwidth which makes them op.
Tryaz Improvised Tactics 95	Posted - 2015.03.24 02:15:47 - [34] - Quote Aeryn Maricadie wrote: Medium drones do not need a buff, they trade less raw damage and the ability to overheat for the ability to project damage just as well from 55km as from 5km, they also have good application in general. They are balanced, the imbalances come from the Gallente ships that can fit far more drones than they ought to due to excessive bandwidth which makes them op. Good thing I'M NOT PROPOSING A BUFF TO MEDIUM DRONES THEN ISN'T IT!!!!!!!!!! I mad bro Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Tryaz Improvised Tactics 95	Posted - 2015.03.24 02:19:22 - [35] - Quote I'd initially wanted to ignore non-Combat drones as many of them have been in a funny place for some time but I have an idea for incorporating them in to my own Drone Control Channels idea and so I've added the following to the OP. EXPANSION 02:11 2015/03/24 Only combat drones utilise a Drone Control Channel (just as only turrets/launchers use a hardpoint) this would allow for utility bandwidth to be used to launch 'extra' Combat Utility, Electronic Warfare, Logisitic, Salvage and Mining drones. Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Aeryn Maricadie Periphery Bound 10	Posted - 2015.03.24 02:20:27 - [36] - Quote Tryaz wrote: Aeryn Maricadie wrote: Medium drones do not need a buff, they trade less raw damage and the ability to overheat for the ability to project damage just as well from 55km as from 5km, they also have good application in general. They are balanced, the imbalances come from the Gallente ships that can fit far more drones than they ought to due to excessive bandwidth which makes them op. Good thing I'M NOT PROPOSING A BUFF TO MEDIUM DRONES THEN ISN'T IT!!!!!!!!!! I mad bro You certainly seem to be why change it so you can launch more than 5 med drones otherwise? that is certainly what you seem to be after otherwise why mess with the mechanic?
Tryaz Improvised Tactics 95	Posted - 2015.03.24 02:21:36 - [37] - Quote Aeryn Maricadie wrote: Tryaz wrote: Aeryn Maricadie wrote: Medium drones do not need a buff, they trade less raw damage and the ability to overheat for the ability to project damage just as well from 55km as from 5km, they also have good application in general. They are balanced, the imbalances come from the Gallente ships that can fit far more drones than they ought to due to excessive bandwidth which makes them op. Good thing I'M NOT PROPOSING A BUFF TO MEDIUM DRONES THEN ISN'T IT!!!!!!!!!! I mad bro You certainly seem to be why change it so you can launch more than 5 med drones otherwise? that is certainly what you seem to be after otherwise why mess with the mechanic? facepalm when you've finished exploring your own tangent and are willing to re-join the discussion I'll be pleased to speak to you again Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Aeryn Maricadie Periphery Bound 10	Posted - 2015.03.24 03:14:48 - [38] - Quote Tryaz wrote: Aeryn Maricadie wrote: Tryaz wrote: Aeryn Maricadie wrote: Medium drones do not need a buff, they trade less raw damage and the ability to overheat for the ability to project damage just as well from 55km as from 5km, they also have good application in general. They are balanced, the imbalances come from the Gallente ships that can fit far more drones than they ought to due to excessive bandwidth which makes them op. Good thing I'M NOT PROPOSING A BUFF TO MEDIUM DRONES THEN ISN'T IT!!!!!!!!!! I mad bro You certainly seem to be why change it so you can launch more than 5 med drones otherwise? that is certainly what you seem to be after otherwise why mess with the mechanic? facepalm when you've finished exploring your own tangent and are willing to re-join the discussion I'll be pleased to speak to you again Your proposed rebalance is to fix the part of the drones that ain't broke. These "channels" would perform the exact same function as bandwidth, except they would take up the high slots effectively nerfing the platform overall. So why? you complained about inelegance and weird fittings, how will adding a bunch of more modules help that?
Tryaz Improvised Tactics 95	Posted - 2015.03.24 03:44:36 - [39] - Quote Aeryn Maricadie wrote: Your proposed rebalance is to fix the part of the drones that ain't broke. These "channels" would perform the exact same function as bandwidth, except they would take up the high slots effectively nerfing the platform overall. So why? you complained about inelegance and weird fittings, how will adding a bunch of more modules help that? Read through everything I've written on this thread and you won't find a SINGLE suggestion for a new module of any kind... what is the point?! Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Tusker Crazinski Delta vane Corp. Mordus Angels 48	Posted - 2015.03.24 06:22:10 - [40] - Quote Aeryn Maricadie wrote: Tusker Crazinski wrote: Aeryn Maricadie wrote: This would basically destroy most drone boats. Remember Gallente isn't the only faction that uses drones, just because Ishtars are OP doesn't mean drones in general are. they are, if not ishtar's it'll be domies and VNI, if not domies then guristas.... all of them, if not guristas than. Now I know the alliance tourney is not a good metric for game balance, but the fact that last year theres was all but 4-5 setups that didn't use drones for DPS speaks volumes about how strong they are in the current state of the game. and It was not just ishtars and seturies. VNIs, Gilas, Dominii, Eosii, were all just as bad. There's a bunch of Amarr boats that would be messed up real bad by this proposal. was in a hurry, but I should have stated I am not in favor of this proposal however it is in the right direction. right now drone boats enjoy the benefit of having no fitting requirements for their weapon system, on weapon system that is already unparalleled in flexibility, requires no cap or ammo, dose more raw DPS for anything smaller than a battleship, and is just as effective at 100 meters to 100 kilometers. yes drone boats lose some PG to compensate however long range turrets in many cases require ALL or MORE of your PG to fit. not only that generally drone boats are low on highs, and distribute those to mids and lows.

Tryaz Improvised Tactics 95	Posted - 2015.03.24 10:21:11 - [41] - Quote Tusker Crazinski wrote: was in a hurry, but I should have stated I am not in favor of this proposal however it is in the right direction. right now drone boats enjoy the benefit of having no fitting requirements for their weapon system, on weapon system that is already unparalleled in flexibility, requires no cap or ammo, dose more raw DPS for anything smaller than a battleship, and is just as effective at 100 meters to 100 kilometers. yes drone boats lose some PG and AN SLOT to compensate however long range turrets in many cases require ALL or MORE of your PG to fit. not only that generally drone boats are low on highs, and distribute those to mids and lows. Interesting: I might agree with you. What about the fact that drone damage can be easily mitigated by destroying drones, does that not de-power them significantly? Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
El Creepo Sex Machineguns 14	Posted - 2015.03.24 10:25:42 - [42] - Quote Your description of drones makes them sound magical. Overlooking their destruction, immobility and being left in space. Drones are their own ammo. You could flip that round and say turrets are an indestructible weapon system that has no effect on the velocity and mobility of your ship and always zero time from activation to damage application. Turrets need a nerf, theyre so powerful! All weapon systems are pretty well balanced, ishtars just need a wee look. I wonder if its not possible to fix just by increasing the bandwidth of sentries to 40 and battleship bandwidth to 200 meaning Ishtars could still have all the mobile drones they have but would be limited to 3 sentries each. The only concern I see there would be the Gecko but a trait of "maximum of 2 can be controlled at a time" would fix that.
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 873	Posted - 2015.03.24 10:30:00 - [43] - Quote Drone balancing is extremely simple. The only imbalanced drone is the sentry drone. It: * projects a great deal of firepower * at fantastic ranges * instantaneously * with the locking time of a frigate (when used with a bunny) and, * lands damage simultaneously with all other sentries, creating an unholy, unstoppable alpha-strike. Simply remove sentry drones. Not one player in Eve will mourn their loss. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Tryaz Improvised Tactics 95	Posted - 2015.03.24 10:37:34 - [44] - Quote Mournful Conciousness wrote: Drone balancing is extremely simple. The only imbalanced drone is the sentry drone. It [...] [...] Simply remove sentry drones. Not one player in Eve will mourn their loss. El Creepo wrote: Your description of drones makes them sound magical. Overlooking their destruction, immobility and being left in space. Drones are their own ammo. Mournful Conciousness, El Creepo thank you for returning to the thread. I've added significantly to the OP and would appreciate your feedback when you've time. Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 873	Posted - 2015.03.24 11:05:42 - [45] - Quote I see what you're trying to achieve, which is some sort of parity with other weapons systems. My view is somewhat tangential to yours - I enjoy drones because they provide an asymmetric complement to gunnery and missiles. For example, when in a skirmish it is often the case that the fleet's fire power is concentrated on one ship - and then a falcon or curse turns up. It's often expedient to drive off this force-multiplying (but quite weak) threat by ordering the fleet to redirect drones to him, while keeping gunnery pressure on the primary. The drone response to this ship can be ECM, dampeners or DPS - all are valid and effective. All you want to do is neutralise his effectiveness while continuing to take down the existential threat of a damage dealer or logistics ship. Prior to the horrid changes to the ishtar and dominix and the advent of the ill-advised drone damage amplifier, this was the way of things - main DPS was provided by guns and missile while supplemental capability was filled in by drones. The combination of range-bonused drone hulls (defeating the original limitations of sentries) and drone damage amps (turning drones into a primary weapons system) has literally changed the game, and not for the better. Previously the advantage was with skirmishers - skilful individualists. Now it is with the ishtar drop-and-scarper drone bunny crowd. The Dominix is not the force that the Ishtar turned out to be because of the existential threat of bomber wings, which since being immune from de-cloaking each other, are vastly overpowered when used against a stationary fleet. Drones are not the problem - they used to work well. The problem is with: * drone damage amps * drone range bonuses on hulls * (and because of the above, causing drone fleets to want to sit still) - bomber decloak immunity roll back the clock on these changes and all will be good with Eve again. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Tryaz Improvised Tactics 96	Posted - 2015.03.24 11:41:12 - [46] - Quote Mournful Conciousness wrote: Drones are not the problem - they used to work well. The problem is with: * drone damage amps * drone range bonuses on hulls * (and because of the above, causing drone fleets to want to sit still) - bomber decloak immunity roll back the clock on these changes and all will be good with Eve again. Dear Mournful, thank you for your well considered response, you raise many excellent points. I've run out of time to respond properly now but look forward to giving your excellent reply a proper treatment later on. Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Krops Vont Hard Knocks Inc. Hard Knocks Citizens 50	Posted - 2015.03.24 15:54:57 - [47] - Quote Mournful Conciousness wrote: The "server load" argument is a red herring. It can be solved with some re-engineering of code to increase parallelism. It's a lazy answer by CCP. Knock knock Who's there? Technological limitations of 2015's standards on a single server based already occupied with assets that belong to people. The last instances of CCP touching the server for a day ended in chaos. Remember when one CCP employee had coffee near the server? Or the time they tried upgrading and moving it? Yeek... As with any human, we must map out everything for the sake of living. So what happens when you put the same aspect in a game with random events? They go nuts trying to figure out how to predict and map out everything.
Tusker Crazinski Delta vane Corp. Mordus Angels 48	Posted - 2015.03.25 00:44:05 - [48] - Quote Tryaz wrote: Interesting: I might agree with you. What about the fact that drone damage can be easily mitigated by destroying drones, does that not de-power them significantly? yeah have you tried shooting bonesed drones recently. Shooting drones is only viable against unbonuses drones with no replacements. bays are way too big, drone sigs is way too low and, and they way too much ******* EHP. I'm not even talking about guristas drones. and really that's one drawback to the myriads of advantages drone have over guns.
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 874	Posted - 2015.03.25 00:57:53 - [49] - Quote see above - remove drone damage amps and the superdrone problem goes away. drone boats would of course need their gunnery bonuses (and missing high slot) back. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 204	Posted - 2015.03.25 01:36:37 - [50] - Quote -1 I see way to many balance issues and a lot of complexity that serves no purpose. [quote=Tryaz]TLDR: Introduce Drone Control Channels which function like Turret/Launcher Hardpoints dictating the number of drones which can be controlled simultaneously. Remove the Drones skill (rationale below). Do the drones ships get additional slots for the "drone channels"? If so how many do they get? If not does each ship have a maximum number of channels as part of it stats? If it is a fixed amount does it start low and can be increased by skills like many other ships stats, if so how is that different than it is now? And lets not forget PG and CPU. Do these channels take PG or CPU if they are used? If so do the drones ships get a bonus amount of PG or CPU to compensate and still allow them to fit a decent tank? Or do the drones pilots have to choose between a weapons system or a tanK? If they do get extra PG and CPU how do you prevent it from being used to make a drones ship OP by applying that extra PG and CPU to another weapons system? thinking what this additional PG and CPU could do for a laser or blaster fit.

Tryaz Improvised Tactics 97	Posted - 2015.03.25 02:01:36 - [51] - Quote Donnachadh wrote: -1 I see way to many balance issues and a lot of complexity that serves no purpose. [quote=Tryaz]TLDR: Introduce Drone Control Channels which function like Turret/Launcher Hardpoints dictating the number of drones which can be controlled simultaneously. Remove the Drones skill (rationale below). Do the drones ships get additional slots for the "drone channels"? If so how many do they get? If not does each ship have a maximum number of channels as part of it stats? If it is a fixed amount does it start low and can be increased by skills like many other ships stats, if so how is that different than it is now? And lets not forget PG and CPU. Do these channels take PG or CPU if they are used? If so do the drones ships get a bonus amount of PG or CPU to compensate and still allow them to fit a decent tank? Or do the drones pilots have to choose between a weapons system or a tanK? If they do get extra PG and CPU how do you prevent it from being used to make a drones ship OP by applying that extra PG and CPU to another weapons system? thinking what this additional PG and CPU could do for a laser or blaster fit. Donnachadh, thanks for your reply. I seem to have explained myself poorly. Drone Control Channels would be a ship attribute just like number of low slots and NOT able to be increased or decreased by skills. Therefore PG&CPU are not a consideration because the Drone Control Channels, just like Turret Hardpoints, are native to the hull. I hope that clears things up. I'm sorry I wasn't clear initially, I'll change the op to reflect your queries. Many thanks Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Tryaz Improvised Tactics 98	Posted - 2015.03.25 14:46:28 - [52] - Quote Mournful Conciousness wrote: I see what you're trying to achieve, which is some sort of parity with other weapons systems. My view is somewhat tangential to yours - I enjoy drones because they provide an asymmetric complement to gunnery and missiles. For example, when in a skirmish it is often the case that the fleet's fire power is concentrated on one ship - and then a falcon or curse turns up. It's often expedient to drive off this force-multiplying (but quite weak) threat by ordering the fleet to redirect drones to him, while keeping gunnery pressure on the primary. The drone response to this ship can be ECM, dampeners or DPS - all are valid and effective. All you want to do is neutralise his effectiveness while continuing to take down the existential threat of a damage dealer or logistics ship. Prior to the horrid changes to the ishtar and dominix and the advent of the ill-advised drone damage amplifier, this was the way of things - main DPS was provided by guns and missile while supplemental capability was filled in by drones. The combination of range-bonused drone hulls (defeating the original limitations of sentries) and drone damage amps (turning drones into a primary weapons system) has literally changed the game, and not for the better. Previously the advantage was with skirmishers - skilful individualists. Now it is with the ishtar drop-and-scarper drone bunny crowd. The Dominix is not the force that the Ishtar turned out to be because of the existential threat of bomber wings, which since being immune from de-cloaking each other, are vastly overpowered when used against a stationary fleet. Drones are not the problem - they used to work well. The problem is with: * drone damage amps * drone range bonuses on hulls * (and because of the above, causing drone fleets to want to sit still) - bomber decloak immunity roll back the clock on these changes and all will be good with Eve again. Dear Mournful. finally I have a moment to reply properly to you. I hear what you're saying, I too enjoy drones when used as a compliment to other weapons systems. I find the tactical implications of drones as a supporting weapons system MUCH more interesting than the current tactical landscape of Drones the primary weapons system. Case in point ATXI - Day 4 Match 100 - Clockwork Pineapple vs Verge of Collapse This is my favourite Alliance Tournament match. For anyone out there who hasn't seen this one I recommend you take the time. I won't spoil it for you but suffice to say there's an interesting use of drones in it. Your points about the problem with Drones are valid and I don't dispute them. Would it be fair to say that the changes which you list could be read as evidence of CCP's desire to make Drones in to a fully formed primary weapon choice? I hope my proposal is a step towards a better drone system. I don't know if you saw the 'expansion' that I added to the OP but you'll see that it is not my desire to ruin or limit the use of drones as a compliment to other systems. Under my expanded proposal you could even conceivably have hulls with no Drone Control Channels that are still able to field non-combat drones. It IS my wish for Drones to one day be a proper primary weapons system but at the moment I join you in lamenting the current state of the Drone ships in EVE - and for many of the same reasons. I look forward to your response Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 876	Posted - 2015.03.25 16:05:53 - [53] - Quote Thanks for the link. In my experience VoC are patient and innovative, and a pleasure to fight. The video shows a nice use of EV drones which has been made possible because there was only one logi ship (as per the rules) per side. This is why it surprised the commentators. In real fights they are almost never useful enough to warrant fielding. In reality, fleets involving only one logistics per side are rare. In w-space (and I presume much of null) the norm is multiple cap-chaining guardians, which would shrug off the EV drones easily. Cap chains are of course more susceptible to damps or ecm (if it's going to be drones, then ECM - the sensor damp drones are awful). Having said that, not many people carry smartbombs these days (since missiles are no longer ubiquitous and the ones that are used now travel much faster than they used to, smart-bomb firewalls are no longer a thing) so it might be a useful strategy to pack a flight of EV-600s into a spare corner of a large amarr drone bay, in case you do meet an AF fleet backed by a lone scimitar. Packing a combat utility drone into the drone bay of a ship which gets a drone damage bonus, or does its damage primarily through drones is of course a losing strategy (for example a curse with ECM drones would be about as dangerous as a pet rabbit). Call me old fashioned, but the gallente back-story involves the use of high-damage, short range blasters backed up with flights of drones to give the ships more capability than merely being limpet mines. The utility drones effectively allowed a change of nuance without a refit. Indeed, until the maximum drone limit was introduced it would have made sense to mix combat and combat-utility drones in a dominix's drone bay - you could field them all at once. But then drone numbers were limited to save server bandwidth and ships with large drone bays given drone damage bonuses to compensate - except CCP forgot to also bonus the combat utility drones at the same time... which led to less diversity in drone choice for gallante pilots - why would you give up 1.5 ogre IIs for 1 EV-900? Now that drone damage amps have appeared the choice is even narrower - no dominix would ever field an ECM or EV or SW drone - you'd lose way too much DPS for the small utility gained from the drone. In any case the dominix is no longer a viable hull to which to fit a gun - there are no bonuses for it, so why even get into gunnery range? In my view this was all a shame. Combat utility drones used to have a combat utility function when used on drone ships. This utility was a complement to the main damage system - the blaster. Now, if you have a bonused drone bay you're probably best off shield-tanking your ship and fitting as many drone damage mods and sentry drones as possible. The drone damage mod has increased the value of specialisation at the expense of diversity. The outcome is the nano-bouncer ishtar. Equipped with 1 target painter each, 3 of these can systematically reduce even quite a large fleet to dust while enduring almost no risk - it's the absolute antithesis of gallante warfare, and totally boring for everyone other than the ishtar pilots. Now to cover your hope that drones should be a primary weapon: Each race already had a primary and secondary weapon of choice: caldari: missiles and hybrids amarr: lasers and neuts minmatar: autocannons and missiles gallente: hybrids and... drones. There is no need for another primary weapons system. The current (mangled) list would look more like this: caldari: not used amarr: lasers or (neuts and drones) minmatar: still projectiles and (maybe) missiles (but more likely a neut) gallente: sentry drones and nothing else The development of the drone damage amp has been a failed experiment which has harmed the game. That's ok - the game is as much a sandbox for the devs as it is for us. But it's time to realise the mistake, correct it and try a new evolution - ideally one which does not break the lore. Having corrected the error, then by all means look at innovative new ways to use drones... or don't. Why not use the time to carefully balance the finer points of the competing doctrines so that ship fitting and selection diversity is increased? Wouldn't that be more fun and interesting? Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Aeryn Maricadie Periphery Bound 13	Posted - 2015.03.25 22:37:27 - [54] - Quote This is still way to close to bandwidth, the only real effect such a change would have is limiting large ships # of light drones for anti frigate defense. If you want to limit the number of sentries that cruisers can use just limit their damn bandwidth.
Rawketsled Generic Corp Name 149	Posted - 2015.03.25 22:45:35 - [55] - Quote Make Heavies use 20MB bandwidth, and Sentries use 25MB. Reduce medium-rigged ship bandwidth by appropriate amounts. CCP has already set a precedent with the Gecko: it uses 50MB.


Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2024, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,03s, ref 20241108/1222
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

bitcoin: 1CHRiBBArqpw5Yz7x5KS2RRtN5ubEn5gF

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.