Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 17 post(s) |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1793
|
Posted - 2016.04.07 01:17:58 -
[361] - Quote
is it intended that the gal FAX does shield RR and the minm does Armor
currently the CPU/PG forces this set up
ofc none of the FAX seem to have enough cpu/pg so idk
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Sekeris
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
12
|
Posted - 2016.04.07 07:24:43 -
[362] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:is it intended that the gal FAX does shield RR and the minm does Armor
currently the CPU/PG forces this set up
ofc none of the FAX seem to have enough cpu/pg so idk
Look at the faction mods, they are much reduced in fitting (shield booster upto 90tf!), and seem to the only way to effectively make use of the fitting room on all capitals...
|
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF Violence of Action.
66
|
Posted - 2016.04.07 07:42:50 -
[363] - Quote
Sekeris wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:is it intended that the gal FAX does shield RR and the minm does Armor
currently the CPU/PG forces this set up
ofc none of the FAX seem to have enough cpu/pg so idk Look at the faction mods, they are much reduced in fitting (shield booster upto 90tf!), and seem to the only way to effectively make use of the fitting room on all capitals... Sure, but those will probably be going for about 400-700 mil each, so it adds up very fast. |
Sekeris
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
12
|
Posted - 2016.04.07 08:14:45 -
[364] - Quote
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:Sekeris wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:is it intended that the gal FAX does shield RR and the minm does Armor
currently the CPU/PG forces this set up
ofc none of the FAX seem to have enough cpu/pg so idk Look at the faction mods, they are much reduced in fitting (shield booster upto 90tf!), and seem to the only way to effectively make use of the fitting room on all capitals... Sure, but those will probably be going for about 400-700 mil each, so it adds up very fast.
I am aware of that, and i think the difference is too big. Afterall on a carrier 90tf will also fit you ~3 drone mods. The difference should be reduced to ~30tf.
For illustration the following gains could be made between T2 and faction per mod, depending on item:
Armor rep local: 18-23 tf lower 18.75-25k mw lower 380-980 gj/activation lower 980-1920 rep amount higher
Armor rep remote: 10-12 tf lower 22.5-30k mw lower 150-550 gj/activation lower -35-105 rep amount lower/higher 1300 m base falloff+optimal higher
Shield boost local: 70-90 tf lower 11.25-15k mw lower 380-980 gj/activation lower 760-1360 boost amount higher
Shield boost remote: 30-35 tf lower 15-20k mw lower 140-740 gj/activation lower -50-150 boost amount lower/higher 1300 m base falloff+optimal higher
The range & rep or boost amount looks ok for the price increase, but the fitting and activation costs look pretty big. More so on the CPU where 30 tf reduction can fit a drone dmg aug on a carrier. Power is not so much of an issue i would say, since that is balanced for capitals. The CPU doesnt change all that much, and while i am sure relatively this fits in with other mods, because the numbers are so big the final result is somewhat overwhelming. Other new capital mods show a similar picture in fitting reduction with faction. If you use a few capital mods you can easily free up 100-200 tf cpu with faction mods (depending on armor or shield fit).
|
Thercon Jair
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
14
|
Posted - 2016.04.09 10:08:05 -
[365] - Quote
Are we going to see a FAX specific thread soon? The release window is drawing ever closer yet there is no aggregated thread for these new ships, that are basically mandatory in any cap fleet. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1836
|
Posted - 2016.04.09 11:10:00 -
[366] - Quote
Sekeris wrote:Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:Sekeris wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:is it intended that the gal FAX does shield RR and the minm does Armor
currently the CPU/PG forces this set up
ofc none of the FAX seem to have enough cpu/pg so idk Look at the faction mods, they are much reduced in fitting (shield booster upto 90tf!), and seem to the only way to effectively make use of the fitting room on all capitals... Sure, but those will probably be going for about 400-700 mil each, so it adds up very fast. I am aware of that, and i think the difference is too big. Afterall on a carrier 90tf will also fit you ~3 drone mods. The difference should be reduced to ~30tf. For illustration the following gains could be made between T2 and faction per mod, depending on item: Armor rep local: 18-23 tf lower 18.75-25k mw lower 380-980 gj/activation lower 980-1920 rep amount higher Armor rep remote: 10-12 tf lower 22.5-30k mw lower 150-550 gj/activation lower -35-105 rep amount lower/higher 1300 m base falloff+optimal higher Shield boost local: 70-90 tf lower 11.25-15k mw lower 380-980 gj/activation lower 760-1360 boost amount higher Shield boost remote: 30-35 tf lower 15-20k mw lower 140-740 gj/activation lower -50-150 boost amount lower/higher 1300 m base falloff+optimal higher The range & rep or boost amount looks ok for the price increase, but the fitting and activation costs look pretty big. More so on the CPU where 30 tf reduction can fit a drone dmg aug on a carrier. Power is not so much of an issue i would say, since that is balanced for capitals. The CPU doesnt change all that much, and while i am sure relatively this fits in with other mods, because the numbers are so big the final result is somewhat overwhelming. Other new capital mods show a similar picture in fitting reduction with faction. If you use a few capital mods you can easily free up 100-200 tf cpu with faction mods (depending on armor or shield fit).
but these mods should be there to get a bit extra out of your ship they should not be required like they will be on the FAX if numbers stay the same
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Sekeris
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
16
|
Posted - 2016.04.09 11:31:49 -
[367] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:but these mods should be there to get a bit extra out of your ship they should not be required like they will be on the FAX if numbers stay the same
And the shield carriers i would say. Armor seems to be in a pretty good place right now. Allthough that is mostly for PVE, i have no idea how they will work out for PVP. Shame. Supers seem better in every way.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1836
|
Posted - 2016.04.09 12:23:07 -
[368] - Quote
Sekeris wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:but these mods should be there to get a bit extra out of your ship they should not be required like they will be on the FAX if numbers stay the same And the shield carriers i would say. Armor seems to be in a pretty good place right now. Allthough that is mostly for PVE, i have no idea how they will work out for PVP. Shame. Supers seem better in every way.
None of the carriers seem to have fitting issues now that CCP confirmed FSU are meant to stack
Well I suppose the Chimera needs one co-processor for a full on tank fit but it's really the fax that have fitting issues
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF Violence of Action.
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.09 12:24:25 -
[369] - Quote
Sekeris wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:but these mods should be there to get a bit extra out of your ship they should not be required like they will be on the FAX if numbers stay the same And the shield carriers i would say. Armor seems to be in a pretty good place right now. Allthough that is mostly for PVE, i have no idea how they will work out for PVP. Shame. Supers seem better in every way. Yeah, it's a shame. They seem to be breaking the pattern of every ship type having it's particular specialty where it's better than any other. Instead, supers look to be strictly better than carriers and titans better than dreads in every way except sustained tank in siege. |
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF Violence of Action.
71
|
Posted - 2016.04.09 12:27:00 -
[370] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Sekeris wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:but these mods should be there to get a bit extra out of your ship they should not be required like they will be on the FAX if numbers stay the same And the shield carriers i would say. Armor seems to be in a pretty good place right now. Allthough that is mostly for PVE, i have no idea how they will work out for PVP. Shame. Supers seem better in every way. None of the carriers seem to have fitting issues now that CCP confirmed FSU are meant to stack Well I suppose the Chimera needs one co-processor for a full on tank fit but it's really the fax that have fitting issues I assume you mean they don't have fitting problems because it's not worth filling the highs with FSUs. In that case, wouldn't other options such as capital neuts cause similar fitting issues? |
|
Sekeris
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
16
|
Posted - 2016.04.09 12:52:02 -
[371] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:None of the carriers seem to have fitting issues now that CCP confirmed FSU are meant to stack
Well I suppose the Chimera needs one co-processor for a full on tank fit but it's really the fax that have fitting issues
I have yet to work out a fit for the shield carrier that works ok and lets me fill out all the slots and add such things as prop mods, tank, and dmg mods. A networked sensor array, 3 FSU, 3 drone mods, T2 shield ex and booster and that is all the cpu is mostly gone. That leaves 36 cpu for the last low, high and 4 mids for the nid, and 194 for the chim and extra mid with my skils.
If you swop the booster and shield ex for a plate and armor rep the archon has 266 cpu left, and the thanny 392.
Not that you would actually use it like that, but still, i think it illustrates the issue. If you think 3 FSU is too many, then a 50k MWD will take up 25tf more cpu.
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote: I assume you mean they don't have fitting problems because it's not worth filling the highs with FSUs. In that case, wouldn't other options such as capital neuts cause similar fitting issues?
Capital neuts are worse for fitting then FSU, so fitting a rack of those hurts more. A networked sensor array and 4 FSU is probably the easiest to fit. Or you would leave 2 slots empty. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1836
|
Posted - 2016.04.09 12:57:05 -
[372] - Quote
Sekeris wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:None of the carriers seem to have fitting issues now that CCP confirmed FSU are meant to stack
Well I suppose the Chimera needs one co-processor for a full on tank fit but it's really the fax that have fitting issues I have yet to work out a fit for the shield carrier that works ok and lets me fill out all the slots and add such things as prop mods, tank, and dmg mods. A networked sensor array, 3 FSU, 3 drone mods, T2 shield ex and booster is all the cpu is mostly gone. That leaves 36 cpu for the last low, high and 4 mids for the nid, and 194 for the chim and extra mid with my skils. If you swop the booster and shield ex for a plate and armor rep the archon has 266 cpu left, and the thanny 392. Not that you would actually use it like that, but still, i think it illustrates the issue. If you think 3 FSU is too many, then a 50k MWD will take up 25tf more cpu. Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote: I assume you mean they don't have fitting problems because it's not worth filling the highs with FSUs. In that case, wouldn't other options such as capital neuts cause similar fitting issues?
Capital neuts are worse for fitting then FSU, so fitting a rack of those hurts more. A networked sensor array and 4 FSU is probably the easiest to fit. Or you would leave 2 slots empty.
For one you should not be fitting an active booster to these things the active reps are balanced around siege modes and carriers lend themselves to a more buffer based fit.
Then after a velocity and mass change to the carriers the prop mods are now a joke and not worth firing to anything other than a mwd for better warp on travel fits.
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1836
|
Posted - 2016.04.09 13:14:24 -
[373] - Quote
I would like to correct myself after going back on sisi I can no longer get the Chimera to fit.
Now I would like to go off on a differant point
There is no such thing as an armor carrier. There are only two carriers and they are both shield
Thannatos and Nid
The archon and the Chimera pretend to have a role in large capital engagements however by the time things shift from dps carrier to tank carrier supers will be used instead.
There is simply no reason to use the archon or chimera over the thanatos and nid
Now the thanatos gets a full DPS and Max tank fit with no fitting mods
Same worth the nid
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Sekeris
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
16
|
Posted - 2016.04.09 13:25:06 -
[374] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Sekeris wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:None of the carriers seem to have fitting issues now that CCP confirmed FSU are meant to stack
Well I suppose the Chimera needs one co-processor for a full on tank fit but it's really the fax that have fitting issues I have yet to work out a fit for the shield carrier that works ok and lets me fill out all the slots and add such things as prop mods, tank, and dmg mods. A networked sensor array, 3 FSU, 3 drone mods, T2 shield ex and booster is all the cpu is mostly gone. That leaves 36 cpu for the last low, high and 4 mids for the nid, and 194 for the chim and extra mid with my skils. If you swop the booster and shield ex for a plate and armor rep the archon has 266 cpu left, and the thanny 392. Not that you would actually use it like that, but still, i think it illustrates the issue. If you think 3 FSU is too many, then a 50k MWD will take up 25tf more cpu. Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote: I assume you mean they don't have fitting problems because it's not worth filling the highs with FSUs. In that case, wouldn't other options such as capital neuts cause similar fitting issues?
Capital neuts are worse for fitting then FSU, so fitting a rack of those hurts more. A networked sensor array and 4 FSU is probably the easiest to fit. Or you would leave 2 slots empty. For one you should not be fitting an active booster to these things the active reps are balanced around siege modes and carriers lend themselves to a more buffer based fit. Then after a velocity and mass change to the carriers the prop mods are now a joke and not worth firing to anything other than a mwd for better warp on travel fits.
While i agree that buffer will be used more for PVP with FAX support, it seems somewhat daft to balance the fit on a carrier just towards buffer. Allthough i have to say that it works pretty well. Active rep i think still would have a place in small groups and pve. As would the MWD/AB.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1869
|
Posted - 2016.04.11 02:44:35 -
[375] - Quote
so i put this idea in the carrier feedback thread but thought i would put it here too
what about giving carriers a range and power bonus to local racial t1 e-war
damps for gal tp for minm td for amarr ecm for caldari
this would give a reason for players to use them in large cap fights (e-war with capital tank)
and separate them from the burst e-war of supers while having a seance of progression
it would also give the armor carriers a use for their mids
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1870
|
Posted - 2016.04.11 03:04:25 -
[376] - Quote
also a nearly minute long reload is crazy for carriers their dps is no where near high enough to warrant that make it 2 seconds at most per charge these things also need to fly back from and to the target
Citadel worm hole tax
|
LittleBlackSheep
ISK Unlimited
3
|
Posted - 2016.04.11 13:43:11 -
[377] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:also a nearly minute long reload is crazy for carriers their dps is no where near high enough to warrant that make it 2 seconds at most per charge these things also need to fly back from and to the target Reload time is quite high, yes. One could say, you lose more damage from calling them back, reload and watch them travel back to their target than just letting them on the field using their normal attack. At least if the target is not absolutely closerange.
However, the worst part about fighters currently is: Once tackled, you lose an entire squad in seconds. They need *at least* 3 or 4 times the buffer they have now and a useful resistance profile. Their small signature and their basespeed do not protect them enough, once webs are on the field.
I tested a well-fitted Thanatos in a C5 Sleeper Site and I was not able to kill even the first wave, the Sleeper switch their damage to the fighters after like 5 seconds and they totally wreck the squads, most times before you can call them back. My entire fighter bay was empty afer a few minutes and the carrier basically worthless. These fightersquads will die even faster (a lot!) vs. T2/T3 cruiser gangs with tackle and medium guns. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1875
|
Posted - 2016.04.11 19:44:38 -
[378] - Quote
LittleBlackSheep wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:also a nearly minute long reload is crazy for carriers their dps is no where near high enough to warrant that make it 2 seconds at most per charge these things also need to fly back from and to the target Reload time is quite high, yes. One could say, you lose more damage from calling them back, reload and watch them travel back to their target than just letting them on the field using their normal attack. At least if the target is not absolutely closerange. However, the worst part about fighters currently is: Once tackled, you lose an entire squad in seconds. They need *at least* 3 or 4 times the buffer they have now and a useful resistance profile. Their small signature and their basespeed do not protect them enough, once webs are on the field. I tested a well-fitted Thanatos in a C5 Sleeper Site and I was not able to kill even the first wave, the Sleeper switch their damage to the fighters after like 5 seconds and they totally wreck the squads, most times before you can call them back. My entire fighter bay was empty afer a few minutes and the carrier basically worthless. These fightersquads will die even faster (a lot!) vs. T2/T3 cruiser gangs with tackle and medium guns.
so glad some one else sees how easy these are to kill no one would listen when i said in pvp using a chimera wont work as you will be out of fighters long b4 a thannatos is out of tank
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Pic'n dor
Wild Sentinels Violence of Action.
46
|
Posted - 2016.04.11 22:10:48 -
[379] - Quote
CCP Lebowski wrote:How to test the Capital changesUPDATE #1: 8 more injectors added! UPDATE #2: Another 8 injectors added!
- All new and updated T1&2 items are seeded on the market at the standard 100isk along with Carriers and Force Auxillaries.
- As of today, you should find that your redeeming queue contains Supercarriers, Titans and a small stack of skill injectors. Hopefully this should be enough to get anyone started in testing these new things! We may give out another batch at a later date but this is not guaranteed, so don't go and sell them all or blow them up immediately!
Hi, Not sure where to post but something seems wrong with industry related to new capital mods T2. I understand that with only siege and triage T2, the use of capital T2 component is a pain but now we will have a full usage of T2 capital modules and we should manufacture them with T2 capital component (the JF ones). Is it in the plan ? Thanks for the work with the citadel expansion and capitals, it's a game rebirth Pic
COUCOU TOUCHE TOUCHE
|
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel
108
|
Posted - 2016.04.12 03:50:52 -
[380] - Quote
Some assorted thoughts:
Please make the fighter ui button a lot bigger easier to see, soooooo many people are not noticing it. The old figher bay fighter amount icons where better. (the previous version to this http://i.imgur.com/uQ3BEKM.png)
Fighter support units all have the same skill requirement. Space Superiority fighters feel too strong they kill heavy attack wings without any chance of the SC pilot being able to react. All heavy and light fighter wings should have the same volume, having them different makes switching awkward, change long range fighter volume to 1800 and Space Superiority fighter volume to 750. Nobody will use support fighters they are not strong enough to be worth sacrificing dps for and thus the questionable bonus on carriers becomes meaningless. Explosion radius on light fighter missiles should be increased they are too good at killing frigates, dictors even pods.
Capital remote reps repair for less then large ones that makes no sense what so ever. Active tanking out of triage/siege in pvp is a joke please fix. Please add deadspace and officer flex hardeners other ways they will not be used on supers.
Burst projector duration could be longer. Thanatos and Nidhoggur should get some more base shield and armor respectively their peak tank potential is less then halve that of the other two. Gallente and Minmatar carriers an super carriers should get their niche reinforced further, more damage for gal more speed/agility for mini, to compete with the vastly superior tank of the others. Caldari and Amarr Fax can get their cap from fitting lots of cheap recharge modules while mini and gal have to fit cap boosters it seems, but at the same time they have less fitting space. Caldari and Amarr Fax are therefore in a good place mini and gal need more fitting and a bigger cap booster bonus to be competitive.
Quote CCP Fozzie:
... The days of balance and forget are over.
|
|
Antony Ottig
Fractal Industries Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2016.04.12 17:54:23 -
[381] - Quote
Quote:Capital remote reps repair for less then large ones that makes no sense what so ever.
CCP focused so much on balancing capitale remote reps under TRIAGE that they missed completly that they are WORSE than simple Large remote reps OUT OF triage!
Capital Remote Armor Repairer IITech II1-á950 GJ18,00 km 12.00 s 875 HP Large Remote Armor Repairer IITech II 365 GJ14,40 km 6.00 s 512 HP
Wtf if this? Just boost the amout of repair it Capital remote reps to be better then Large and lower the TRIAGE rep bonus for cap modules |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1994
|
Posted - 2016.04.13 03:06:01 -
[382] - Quote
Antony Ottig wrote:Quote:Capital remote reps repair for less then large ones that makes no sense what so ever. CCP focused so much on balancing capitale remote reps under TRIAGE that they missed completly that they are WORSE than simple Large remote reps OUT OF triage! Capital Remote Armor Repairer II__ Tech II __1-á950 GJ__18,00 km __12.00 s __875 HP Large Remote Armor Repairer II __ Tech II ____365 GJ__14,40 km ___6.00 s __512 HP Wtf if this? Just boost the amout of repair it Capital remote reps to be better then Large and lower the TRIAGE rep bonus for cap modules
have you not been paying attention? they wanted to remove any and all chance of spider-tanking capitals so they made sure Capital RR is basically worthless outside of triage
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Luscius Uta
Anomalous Existence Low-Class
209
|
Posted - 2016.04.13 06:52:09 -
[383] - Quote
Do capital neuts have undocumented reduced effectiveness on ships with signature radius below 8000 m? If not, what their signature radius attribute means? And if yes, it'll mean people will still fit heavy neuts to get rid of stuff like HICs.
Workarounds are not bugfixes.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2021
|
Posted - 2016.04.13 06:56:45 -
[384] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:Do capital neuts have undocumented reduced effectiveness on ships with signature radius below 8000 m? If not, what their signature radius attribute means? And if yes, it'll mean people will still fit heavy neuts to get rid of stuff like HICs.
What do you mean undocumented?
But yes they have a reduced effectiveness the math works the same as with bombs
They are not supposed to replace heavy nuets on capitals they are just a new nuet meant to be used against capitals
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Luscius Uta
Anomalous Existence Low-Class
209
|
Posted - 2016.04.13 07:10:13 -
[385] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Luscius Uta wrote:Do capital neuts have undocumented reduced effectiveness on ships with signature radius below 8000 m? If not, what their signature radius attribute means? And if yes, it'll mean people will still fit heavy neuts to get rid of stuff like HICs. What do you mean undocumented? But yes they have a reduced effectiveness the math works the same as with bombs They are not supposed to replace heavy nuets on capitals they are just a new nuet meant to be used against capitals
I mean there's nothing in the module description that implies what the purpose of new signature radius attribute is. Not sure if someone explained it in forum posts previously though, but I haven't read every forum post ever.
Workarounds are not bugfixes.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2023
|
Posted - 2016.04.13 07:18:24 -
[386] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Luscius Uta wrote:Do capital neuts have undocumented reduced effectiveness on ships with signature radius below 8000 m? If not, what their signature radius attribute means? And if yes, it'll mean people will still fit heavy neuts to get rid of stuff like HICs. What do you mean undocumented? But yes they have a reduced effectiveness the math works the same as with bombs They are not supposed to replace heavy nuets on capitals they are just a new nuet meant to be used against capitals I mean there's nothing in the module description that implies what the purpose of new signature radius attribute is. Not sure if someone explained it in forum posts previously though, but I haven't read every forum post ever.
It's not like it's some new attribute. Or does the same thing it does for any other item with it. I guess I'm still confused. Why does this one module warrant an explenation fit this one stat?
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Luscius Uta
Anomalous Existence Low-Class
209
|
Posted - 2016.04.13 07:33:22 -
[387] - Quote
Because it's a new stat that wasn't associated with this type of module, and why is there no signature radius factor for heavy and medium neuts as well? Doesn't seem only incomprehensive but inconsistent as well.
Workarounds are not bugfixes.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2025
|
Posted - 2016.04.13 07:38:28 -
[388] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:Because it's a new stat that wasn't associated with this type of module, and why is there no signature radius factor for heavy and medium neuts as well? Doesn't seem only incomprehensive but inconsistent as well.
OH I normally look at the stats of modules before I fit them the first time so I wasn't thinking that way
Yes something in the description about being intended fir use against very large targets would be good
Add to why there is no such factor for other nuets that is because they ate intended to be used against all sizes
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2050
|
Posted - 2016.04.13 16:52:51 -
[389] - Quote
Looks like you missed the T1 locust when you changed the sizes
also i like how the minm/amarr are getting better range
but why do T2 supiriority fighters have less tank when they proc the evasive maneuvers than the t1?
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Antony Ottig
Fractal Industries Shadow of xXDEATHXx
2
|
Posted - 2016.04.13 18:47:19 -
[390] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
have you not been paying attention? they wanted to remove any and all chance of spider-tanking capitals so they made sure Capital RR is basically worthless outside of triage
So what stops me from spider tanking with large remote rep modules? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |