| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
CODE.
13381
   |
Posted - 2015.06.11 23:28:58 -
[1] - Quote
If you want to nerf bombs, nerf bombs. Don't wreck a whole bunch of other things in the process.
I cannot overstress my disagreement with this change.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
CODE.
13409
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 17:26:54 -
[2] - Quote
And here I was waiting for them to announce alliance bookmarks as a way to mitigate the huge negative effect this has on flying fleets between corps in an alliance.
Of course not.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
CODE.
13416
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 22:51:44 -
[3] - Quote
Zappity wrote:
That is one if their stated goals: "...reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets."
I'm still wondering why that was under consideration to begin with.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
CODE.
13419
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 23:29:34 -
[4] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Zappity wrote:
That is one if their stated goals: "...reduce the speed at which fleets can get on top of targets."
I'm still wondering why that was under consideration to begin with. As far as I can tell this is a problem in the nullsec fleet meta and they are perfectly happy to stuff up fleets everywhere else to fix that problem.
What, that people can get fights? If they want fleets to drop on people less quickly, then how about they curb the hilarious speed power creep that has cropped up the past couple of years?
Or would that mean admitting that the interceptor changes were wrong?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
CODE.
13432
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 00:01:49 -
[5] - Quote
Zappity wrote:
I doubt they have a cohesive plan. Interceptor change and mining signatures being changed to anomalies go in one direction, this goes in the other. Bizarre.
Gotta agree on that one. It seems like, due to Fozzie's earlier comment, they are just scrambling to make this not look like an obvious sidehanded nerf to bombers.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
CODE.
13436
|
Posted - 2015.06.14 03:59:18 -
[6] - Quote
Busta Rock wrote:
I have always been of the opinion that capabilities should be ADDED to enable new evolutions to gameplay, NOT nerfed (or at the very least additions should be made to compensate FOR nerfs), this goes at least as far back as the Great Nano Nerf, where I would have much preferred capability additions to counter nanomachs and the like (been playing the game for 7+ years now, and the moment nanoships got nerfed, I lost all interest in the Machariel... it was my dream ship BECAUSE SPEED)
I oppose power creep in general just on principle, but if you can't admit that the nano age was a goddamned nightmare, then I don't know what to tell you.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
| |
|