Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 51 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17498
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 16:38:36 -
[1351] - Quote
As you have been shown many times nothing you can fit in that slot will out preform a DCU. Hence why even you fit them on all of your combat ships. |
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
486
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 16:58:21 -
[1352] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:The fact a heap of people clearly have no clue how these things actually work doesn't invalidate it as a must have module. Balancing around stupid people is a bad place to start. You're going to end up with stupid results, like this.
Besides, in every case I checked, the primary tank gain (shield or armor) was greater than the hull gains. I'm sure there are some hilarious snowflake fits where this is not true but it holds for the majority. The smart player is not giving up a DC, ever, for a serious fleet.
And all these geniuses who ditch the DCU, well they're all going to hit hull a hell of a lot faster and the pissant native resists on it is not going to save them.
The correct way to make this change was to hammer the shield and armor resists and do nothing else. Then the module looks less attractive.
Yes. Precisely this. In fact, I'd say you have to seriously nerf the shield resist before it becomes more desirable (or at least debatable) to put on a Power Diagnostic. And for armor, you have to hammer it to the point where it becomes debatable against a second EANM or a reactive. Until you do both of those things, it's still going to be the single-best module to put on your ship.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
487
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 17:15:18 -
[1353] - Quote
Oh, and by the way, passive module? My Blockade Runners are going to love this. My lowslot is ready.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Violet Crumble
Funtime Factory
794
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 17:28:44 -
[1354] - Quote
Just in case Fozzie is still reading this, this Extra Cedits video provides a good explanation of the issue I have with the blanket change, especially the summary statement at the end:
http://youtu.be/ea6UuRTjkKs
In the end, this change reduces challenge for players like me and just becomes more punishing for the players that normally present the challenge I need to plan for.
It's a bad change for both of us, for a module that isn't even relevant to the class of ships I fly most often.
Funtime Factory - We put the fun back in funtime
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7389
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 17:45:05 -
[1355] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Besides, in every case I checked, the primary tank gain (shield or armor) was greater than the hull gains. I'm sure there are some hilarious snowflake fits where this is not true but it holds for the majority. The smart player is not giving up a DC, ever, for a serious fleet. But again, you are still only talking about raw EHP. It's perfectly reasonable that someone wasn't willing to zero off their hull resists to gain some damage, but would be willing to cut them to 34% for the same.
Morrigan LeSante wrote:And all these geniuses who ditch the DCU, well they're all going to hit hull a hell of a lot faster and the pissant native resists on it is not going to save them. But that doesn't matter, since the point is to act as an emergency buffer. The problem is that ships fit for non-hull tank, armor more often than shield, hit hull and their HP vanishes in an instant before they have time to react. A 33% resist significantly increased that emergency buffer. Up until now you pretty much had to sacrifice a low slot to do that, but now you won't.
Morrigan LeSante wrote:The correct way to make this change was to hammer the shield and armor resists and do nothing else. Then the module looks less attractive. Except then ships who previously did fit the DCU get crippled, ships that didn't become OP and balance is broken anyway. The idea here isn't to remove the DCU, but just blunt it down just a fraction.
baltec1 wrote:As you have been shown many times nothing you can fit in that slot will out preform a DCU. Hence why even you fit them on all of your combat ships. Oh does it now? OK, explain to me how a DCU outperforms an overdrive if I want my ship to go faster. Again, you are only ever looking at EHP. I don't fit a DCU on all my combat ships, far from it, and after this change I'll be removing it from some of my PVE ships too.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7389
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 17:49:03 -
[1356] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:Yes. Precisely this. In fact, I'd say you have to seriously nerf the shield resist before it becomes more desirable (or at least debatable) to put on a Power Diagnostic. And for armor, you have to hammer it to the point where it becomes debatable against a second EANM or a reactive. Until you do both of those things, it's still going to be the single-best module to put on your ship. So you're saying make other modules better than it, thus make it completely useless, and in at the same time totally cripple ships that currently use a DC relative to ships that don't. Good job.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17498
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 18:13:55 -
[1357] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Oh does it now? OK, explain to me how a DCU outperforms an overdrive if I want my ship to go faster. Again, you are only ever looking at EHP. I don't fit a DCU on all my combat ships, far from it, and after this change I'll be removing it from some of my PVE ships too.
PVE ships dont tend to fit them anyway and that overdrive isnt going to help you from having a noticeably weaker tank than any of your enemies in a likewise ship. All that overdrive is going to do is let you piledrive into an enemy faster and then die. |
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
487
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 18:18:34 -
[1358] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Khan Wrenth wrote:Yes. Precisely this. In fact, I'd say you have to seriously nerf the shield resist before it becomes more desirable (or at least debatable) to put on a Power Diagnostic. And for armor, you have to hammer it to the point where it becomes debatable against a second EANM or a reactive. Until you do both of those things, it's still going to be the single-best module to put on your ship. So you're saying make other modules better than it, thus make it completely useless, and in at the same time totally cripple ships that currently use a DC relative to ships that don't. Good job. Why are you still here? You have no idea what you're blathering on about, and last time I checked you inferred that people having opposing opinions to yours was some sort of conspiracy.
I shouldn't dignify you with a response, because people might mistake that for you having something valuable to add to the discussion and normally worthy of response. But, like an evolution denier with an hour-long infomercial on TV, we can't just let that go unchallenged.
Now with your latest fail, you quoted me saying that the DC should be competitive but not outright better than certain modules, but then you went ahead and accused me of asking for it to be completely useless. Seriously Kell, you have no apparent connection to reality, you can't even remain connected to the very thing you're posting. Quit EvE. Sparing everyone else having to read your posts is possibly the only good thing you can contribute at this point.
In case you also cannot understand what is inferred without being outright said, I'll repeat myself: DCU too powerful for primary defense layers. If the Devs want to actually achieve their goal of making the DCU "Good, but not a must have", then they can't keep DCU stats as strong as they currently are. Hence, nerf shield and armor resists."
There. Now with that having been said three times (original post, twice here now), be gone, don't return until you establish some sort of connection to the real world. Capiche?
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7389
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 19:15:38 -
[1359] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:PVE ships dont tend to fit them anyway and that overdrive isnt going to help you from having a noticeably weaker tank than any of your enemies in a likewise ship. All that overdrive is going to do is let you piledrive into an enemy faster and then die. Faster ships always die?
Seriously, the point is that unless you only care about EHP, choices vary, and now will vary slightly more. Every single argument you have about it comes back to "but you have less EHP" which everyone knows but isn't the only factor if you care about other stats too.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17498
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 19:32:54 -
[1360] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Faster ships always die?
They tend to when you randomly stick an overdrive on it rather than fit tanking mods.
Lucas Kell wrote: Seriously, the point is that unless you only care about EHP, choices vary, and now will vary slightly more. Every single argument you have about it comes back to "but you have less EHP" which everyone knows but isn't the only factor if you care about other stats too.
And yet everyone fits them today. They provide the same advantage after this change as they do today, if you fit it now you will be fitting it after this change. |
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4782
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 21:13:32 -
[1361] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Morrigan LeSante wrote:Besides, in every case I checked, the primary tank gain (shield or armor) was greater than the hull gains. I'm sure there are some hilarious snowflake fits where this is not true but it holds for the majority. The smart player is not giving up a DC, ever, for a serious fleet. But again, you are still only talking about raw EHP.
No Lucas, that is a straw man you have made up. Everyone is pointing out that the EHP gains from this module outstrips the benefits of other modules, be it other tanking modules or say modules to improve damage output.
Pre and post-patch the DC will end up adding pretty much the same EHP to a ship, yes? Note, I am not saying the stats are the same, but at the end of the fitting process a given ship with a DC II will have the same EHP before and after the patch. You'll still get the same boost to shield resists, the same boost to armor resists, and with the boost the hull resists the same boost to hull resists...so the EHP will be the same (actually slightly better post patch by 0.4% for hull EHP, but put that aside).
Now it is true that the hull EHP will not be reduced as much by taking off the DC II, but you will lose the shield and armor bonus to those resists entirely. Now you keep insisting that EHP is not everything, and you are correct, but the question is what will a player put in that now empty slot? A damage module? Okay, fine...but the boost the damage modules is in the neighborhood of 10% and 10.5%. Further, if you have one already fit you'll get stacking penalties. So, if the removal of the DC reduces you EHP by more than 10.5% (and usually it does) then it is probably not going to be a good idea. While you will be doing 4-10% more damage you'll also be considerably easier to kill.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7389
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 21:39:12 -
[1362] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:No Lucas, that is a straw man you have made up. Everyone is pointing out that the EHP gains from this module outstrips the benefits of other modules, be it other tanking modules or say modules to improve damage output. No, it's really not. Every single time you guys have made an argument, it's been about how much the defense will drop. Defense isn't; all that matters v0v. YOU say it outstrips what other modules can do, but YOU are placing value on the properties of a ship. Other people place different amounts of value on different stats. What you refuse to accept is that people have different preferences to you, which is ridiculous.
Teckos Pech wrote:Now it is true that the hull EHP will not be reduced as much by taking off the DC II Yup, and thus the removal of it will make less of an impact, therefore more people will be more likely to opt not to use it, do you not agree? All I'm saying is that the number of people choosing not to use it after the patch that did before is greater than zero.
Teckos Pech wrote:Now you keep insisting that EHP is not everything, and you are correct, but the question is what will a player put in that now empty slot? A damage module? Okay, fine...but the boost the damage modules is in the neighborhood of 10% and 10.5%. Further, if you have one already fit you'll get stacking penalties. So, if the removal of the DC reduces you EHP by more than 10.5% (and usually it does) then it is probably not going to be a good idea. While you will be doing 4-10% more damage you'll also be considerably easier to kill. A whole range of modules. I don't value EHP the same as other stats on all my ships. Yield on a mining barge for example I generally value much more than EHP since EHP can be made up for with evasion, as long as my base defense and agility are at a reasonable level. Damage on a mission blitzer is generally favourable, though I need to know that if I run into trouble I won't be vapourised.
Could the DCU be reduced more, sure, but they have to be pretty careful they don't cripple the ships that would have used it before relative that those that wouldn't.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4782
|
Posted - 2016.03.02 23:08:22 -
[1363] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:No Lucas, that is a straw man you have made up. Everyone is pointing out that the EHP gains from this module outstrips the benefits of other modules, be it other tanking modules or say modules to improve damage output. No, it's really not. Every single time you guys have made an argument, it's been about how much the defense will drop. Defense isn't; all that matters v0v. YOU say it outstrips what other modules can do, but YOU are placing value on the properties of a ship. Other people place different amounts of value on different stats. What you refuse to accept is that people have different preferences to you, which is ridiculous.
Nobody has said defense is all that matters. Nobody. That is something you are ascribing to everyone who disagrees with you.
And in an objective sense the gains to defense from the DC are larger than the gains from other modules. A 15% boost to overall EHP is pretty large. Most other modules will not provide a benefit that large in percentage terms.
Now, maybe I care much, much more about speed so I give it a heavier weight so that a 6% boost to speed is seen as more desirable than the benefits of EHP. I would argue however that given the pre-post effects of a DC you would not have been fitting one in the first place.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Morrigan LeSante
Black Omega Security The OSS
1302
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 08:16:20 -
[1364] - Quote
Let me get this straight.
Everyone fits it today because of the EHP boost.
You're actually complaining people are looking at the EHP results when considering the rebalance?
uuummm...lol...I guess
Here's the thing, the hull gains on anything not a capital are so minor that if any fit was viable without a DCU today, it would already not be running one.
The change to make it less desirable has not really worked as intended, because it remains a mandatory tanking mod for all serious ships. And yes, EHP isn't everything, but considering the primary reason they are fit is in fact EHP and specifically armor/shield boost is going unchanged there remains exactly no reason to change fits. As I say, special comedy snowflake crap aside. |
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
2323
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 08:26:32 -
[1365] - Quote
Let's summarize this thread and the changes to the DC:
1) If you fit it for the non-stacking shield and armor bonus like you would on a shield or armor tank fit which are ALMOST ALL fits, it will not change anything, you don't care about the hull bonus anyway, you still want to fit it.
2) If you fit it because you are an elite PvPer who tanks with hull, nothing will change since this is the only module which gives you additional resists to hull, you HAVE to fit it.
The only thing that seams to come out of this is a buff to Freighters who could not fit them in the first place.
Well played Fozzy, well played.
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
Anthar Thebess
1469
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 08:35:11 -
[1366] - Quote
Ima Wreckyou wrote:Let's summarize this thread and the changes to the DC:
1) If you fit it for the non-stacking shield and armor bonus like you would on a shield or armor tank fit which are ALMOST ALL fits, it will not change anything, you don't care about the hull bonus anyway, you still want to fit it.
2) If you fit it because you are an elite PvPer who tanks with hull, nothing will change since this is the only module which gives you additional resists to hull, you HAVE to fit it.
The only thing that seams to come out of this is a buff to Freighters who could not fit them in the first place.
Well played Fozzy, well played. And T1 Indy ships that never fit damage control.
Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists
Show your support to The Cause!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7389
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 08:44:08 -
[1367] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Nobody has said defense is all that matters. Nobody. That is something you are ascribing to everyone who disagrees with you. No, it's a natural progression of the fact that every time someone suggests that players might actually like to fit a non-defensive module, there's a chorus of "BUT THE EHP LOSS!".
Teckos Pech wrote:And in an objective sense the gains to defense from the DC are larger than the gains from other modules. A 15% boost to overall EHP is pretty large. Most other modules will not provide a benefit that large in percentage terms. And if were all sitting around objectively fitting ships like good little EFT monkeys then I'd agree, but ship fitting isn't objective, it's entirely down to individual preference and use.
Teckos Pech wrote:Now, maybe I care much, much more about speed so I give it a heavier weight so that a 6% boost to speed is seen as more desirable than the benefits of EHP. I would argue however that given the pre-post effects of a DC you would not have been fitting one in the first place. That depends entirely on how much preference you put on it. Zeroing hull resists is a bit more of a sacrifice than dropping them to 34%, so some people will fall within that category of did want before, dont; want after. That's what they are going for. People like baltec seem to be pushing for a situation where noone in their right mind would bother using a DC. I don;t believe that's what CCP are going for.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Morrigan LeSante
Black Omega Security The OSS
1303
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 09:50:32 -
[1368] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: but ship fitting isn't objective, it's entirely down to individual preference and use.
Said no fleet FC, ever.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7389
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 12:14:41 -
[1369] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Said no fleet FC, ever. My bad, I forgot that everyone flies in a fleet with an FC under a doctrine and that not a single player chooses their own fits for any activity in the game.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17498
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 12:48:05 -
[1370] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Morrigan LeSante wrote:Said no fleet FC, ever. My bad, I forgot that everyone flies in a fleet with an FC under a doctrine and that not a single player chooses their own fits for any activity in the game.
You putting together shitfits doesnt change the fact that damn near every ship fits the DCU now and all of them will continue to fit the DCU after this change. |
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7389
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 13:15:34 -
[1371] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:You putting together shitfits doesnt change the fact that damn near every ship fits the DCU now and all of them will continue to fit the DCU after this change. Except they won't. I know for a fact that some ships will not fit the DC afterwards since I will be removing the DC from some of my ships, thus you are categorically wrong. And we're not talking about people fitting shitfits, just people who don't fit in exactly the same way you do. vOv
Is it any wonder that your complaints about the change are ignored when you make clear and obvious fabrications instead of realistic arguments?
Enjoy the buff!
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17498
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 13:30:25 -
[1372] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Except they won't. I know for a fact that some ships will not fit the DC afterwards since I will be removing the DC from some of my ships, thus you are categorically wrong. And we're not talking about people fitting shitfits, just people who don't fit in exactly the same way you do. vOv
Is it any wonder that your complaints about the change are ignored when you make clear and obvious fabrications instead of realistic arguments?
Enjoy the buff!
Which ships and fits are you going to take them off? |
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
836
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 13:39:07 -
[1373] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:baltec1 wrote:You putting together shitfits doesnt change the fact that damn near every ship fits the DCU now and all of them will continue to fit the DCU after this change. Except they won't. I know for a fact that some ships will not fit the DC afterwards since I will be removing the DC from some of my ships, thus you are categorically wrong. And we're not talking about people fitting shitfits, just people who don't fit in exactly the same way you do. vOv Is it any wonder that your complaints about the change are ignored when you make clear and obvious fabrications instead of realistic arguments? Enjoy the buff! Just spent a few hours on SISI playing with the "new" DCU.
Anyone who uses a DCU now on a fit will continue to do so.
My T2 haulers have a little more EHP with hull resists (no DCU fitted) My JF has a reasonable buff (no DCU)
The rest of my fits - NO change, with the built in hull resist and shield, armor resists unchanged the DCU still has exactly the same use as it does now.
Only issue I have with the new DCU is i kept trying to activate it and ended up off lining it. That I'll get used to.
New DCU is a bit of a buff for those fits that don't or can't fit a DCU (T1, T2 haulers, freighters, some fits on smaller ships), other than that it gives exactly the same resist profile it does now. Someone may come up with some niche fits that no longer use a DCU but they will have the same drawback as they do now - a lower resist profile.
NB; The bonus from the new DCU is the officer and faction modules, they will when used correctly give a really nice EHP buff to just about any ship worth spending the isk on.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
Cristl
355
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 13:53:03 -
[1374] - Quote
You **** ranting on about nothing have now blown this thread to such a size that Fozzie will never read it.
If we could have just recommended a decrease in the shield and armour resistances (keeping the hull changes) then the job would be done. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2309
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 14:38:34 -
[1375] - Quote
Cristl wrote:You **** ranting on about nothing have now blown this thread to such a size that Fozzie will never read it.
If we could have just recommended a decrease in the shield and armour resistances (keeping the hull changes) then the job would be done.
But, that's not what I wanted. I like that the damage control is a damn near mandatory module. I wouldn't want to see it actually become less useful. And, frankly, I don't care one bit about whether freighters got a decent buff out of this change, because I don't fly one in high sec and I won't ever be shooting one in high sec. If I should happen to find one in 0.0, it will die so fast anyway that it won't matter (and if it lives long enough for someone else to try to save it, so much the better, we all get a fight out of it!).
Fozzie's job here was not actually to make the DCU less useful, it was to slip through a small nerf to freighter ganking with the minimum amount of teeth-gnashing and frothing at the mouth. I'd say he did this pretty well.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Cristl
355
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:29:13 -
[1376] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:But, that's not what I wanted. I like that the damage control is a damn near mandatory module. I wouldn't want to see it actually become less useful. And, frankly, I don't care one bit about whether freighters got a decent buff out of this change, because I don't fly one in high sec and I won't ever be shooting one in high sec. If I should happen to find one in 0.0, it will die so fast anyway that it won't matter (and if it lives long enough for someone else to try to save it, so much the better, we all get a fight out of it!).
Fozzie's job here was not actually to make the DCU less useful, it was to slip through a small nerf to freighter ganking with the minimum amount of teeth-gnashing and frothing at the mouth. I'd say he did this pretty well. I don't care about the freighter effects either, but mandatory modules are piss-poor design: they could just be baked into the hull and a relevant slot removed.
We should always be pondering the pros and cons of modules, not just automatically grabbing certain mods because they're head and shoulders above the rest in their class.
It's lazy. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7389
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:34:11 -
[1377] - Quote
Cristl wrote:You **** ranting on about nothing have now blown this thread to such a size that Fozzie will never read it.
If we could have just recommended a decrease in the shield and armour resistances (keeping the hull changes) then the job would be done. The job wouldn't be done though, because any ship that used to use the DC would be losing a chunk of their defense while any ship that didn't use the DC wouldn't lose a thing, so it would be a direct nerf to a whole range of fits.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4782
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:45:57 -
[1378] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:Let's summarize this thread and the changes to the DC:
1) If you fit it for the non-stacking shield and armor bonus like you would on a shield or armor tank fit which are ALMOST ALL fits, it will not change anything, you don't care about the hull bonus anyway, you still want to fit it.
2) If you fit it because you are an elite PvPer who tanks with hull, nothing will change since this is the only module which gives you additional resists to hull, you HAVE to fit it.
The only thing that seams to come out of this is a buff to Freighters who could not fit them in the first place.
Well played Fozzy, well played. You forgot: - T1 Indy ships that never fit damage control. - Capitals and supers
So it is even more of a must have module.
To quote Ima, "Well played Fozzy, well played."
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Cristl
362
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:49:30 -
[1379] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Cristl wrote:You **** ranting on about nothing have now blown this thread to such a size that Fozzie will never read it.
If we could have just recommended a decrease in the shield and armour resistances (keeping the hull changes) then the job would be done. The job wouldn't be done though, because any ship that used to use the DC would be losing a chunk of their defense while any ship that didn't use the DC wouldn't lose a thing, so it would be a direct nerf to a whole range of fits. Indeed it would. And that would be a good thing.
To be honest, the whole childish "any time something is reduced in power (nerfed) it's a bad thing for the universe" mantra grinds my gears. |
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
154
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 17:49:58 -
[1380] - Quote
I got some things to do in this thread. Please expect a bit of a wait.
ISD Max Trix
Lieutenant
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
I do not respond to Evemails.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 51 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |