Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Pretagos Omilas
Arch Arsonists of EvE Another Really Stupid Enterprise
8
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 12:26:08 -
[1051] - Quote
Dread Red wrote:But the bottom line is an extremely high percentage of pliots who get ganked get their vessel destroyed aka they don't survive. There we are again with the conditional probability. A high percentage of people flying a combat ship without bothering to do anything to stay alive will die. There, that is basically the same sentence as yours. Can you see the flaw?
Dread Red wrote:Spin and play word games if it makes you feel better about your position but everyone playing EVE for longer than a month actually knows the truth, combat ships survive combat better than mining ships. I'd ague it is you who is spinning and playing word games but since we probably cannot agree here why don't we just stop here repeating ourselves and let every reader decide what his/her conclusion is...
note: removed parts of quotes for readability purposes. |
Demortis
Peoples Resource Center and Training... Peoples United Republic Empire
3
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 14:50:47 -
[1052] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:you are going to sit there and tell me your miner sitting in a HS belt is at a greater risk than a pilot going into combat?
as for HS ganking yes the in game risk reward is pretty good. it will cost you more in cats to kill a well tanked proc than the proc costs and it will certainly cost you more than the loot that drops. with freighters you run the risk of losing a good deal of isk and have it turn out empty. Why does it seem so imbalanced? because what the gankers are looking for isn't some in game reward they just want to see you pop. so even if they have to spend 25-30 mill killing a proc that drops 3mill it was still worth it. You can't balance the risk/reward when the reward is something they get outside of the in game rewards w/o severely upsetting the balance in the rest of eve.
now to get off the topic of HS ganking and what ccp should or should not do about it
with the rorqual maybe the risk/reward is to high for most players to put in the belt if this is the case rather than just trying to keep it 100% safe lets look at other options
why not lower the price? say cut it in half so it is closer to the price of a carrier 1~1.2B Even i can see that an increase in the risk it is taking on may warrant looking into rebalancing the amount of effort they take to build
If you had any clue to how you sound with your posts you'd laugh as much as 2000 coalition has been at you for about 2 days now. Your posts are backwards my friend yes a miner boosters has about 100 times more risk going out in this upgrade there ship is worth 2Bn and your combat fighter is what 100M to be fair. Come on think a bit before posting we are not talking procurers here we are talking the changes they are proposing to make to our boosters the big isk items in the game. Next time you post think about what your saying it's getting lame. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2996
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 15:00:29 -
[1053] - Quote
yes the change to your boosts that mean you may actually have to risk something to get the rewards oh the horror sorry if i find it hard to be sympathetic to your entitlement
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Demortis
Peoples Resource Center and Training... Peoples United Republic Empire
3
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 15:13:35 -
[1054] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:yes the change to your boosts that mean you may actually have to risk something to get the rewards oh the horror sorry if i find it hard to be sympathetic to your entitlement
lol not entitled at all over here we know what we can and won't do to keep our investments. You might hunt fight and score the value your expecting to get or lose it all but when it comes to indie we weigh our risks and the value it will bring in and to risk that velue to say theres boosts most of us are already picking new games to meet up in and with zero miners and zero builders your looking at zero content for yourself. So instead of coming on here with no real input for CCP and the bla bla blaing you are doing it's kind of a waste of forums space. Trully we all have posted our thoughts and CCP will make the minds up without us and role out no matter what we say. But with that said I know just by looking at the daily that CCP is losing members and most of them are indie the ones that made the ships you fly the ammo you burn and the fits you use. Without us doing our jobs you would then have to become us just to fight get how the cycle works. :P |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2998
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 15:18:31 -
[1055] - Quote
... you do understand i'm an industrial pilot right?
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Warlord Balrog
303rd X-SOLDIER
2
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 16:48:59 -
[1056] - Quote
Balder Verdandi wrote: Then we look at how the new on grid boosts go into effect, where you're basically "shooting" fleet mates to give them boosts but could trigger aggression so it makes the boosting pilot a suspect. This totally defeats the purpose of providing mining boosts because now you're a suspect and can be shot at by neutrals.
I really don't think anyone has actually sat down and looked at it from the point of view of a miner/booster, much less an industrial corp, and asked them what they need, how they do mining ops, and what they would like in changes for boost.
At this point, I might just pull that SP from my toons and forget about mining/boosting altogether, since there is far too much risk and no reward.
Agreed, not even taking into account a corporation's "Friendly fire" setting. Losing an expensive ship providing bonuses to a small or very large operation would instill a hindered play style to which I'm sure many people will abandon all together without careful thought.
As I sit here since announcement, and think about these things myself. I wonder if enough of us miners abandon our roots and the market seed we provide for the very ships that will be destroying us, thus marking up their costs due to supply chains being lost will make cause for reconsideration, or at least more thought. |
Sylvia Kildare
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 17:33:54 -
[1057] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:no i mean the entire use of dps carriers was changed to the point that they no longer fly the same way. if i meant the change to triage i would have maid not of it
Ah, okay. Fair enough.
I didn't get to fly an ol' carrier pre-changes (ah, slowcats... as a sentry-drone-loving pilot, that woulda been... fun? I dunno, people say they weren't fun, but... eh), so when you said carrier changes, I didn't think of the no-more-heavy/sentry-drones and major-changes-to-fighters changes first... as to me (from a subcap-only outsider's POV), the FAX machine/carrier ship split was more of a big deal than the way carriers do their damage changing.
But perspective is everything. |
Dread Red
12
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 17:40:56 -
[1058] - Quote
Pretagos Omilas wrote:Dread Red wrote:But the bottom line is an extremely high percentage of pliots who get ganked get their vessel destroyed aka they don't survive. There we are again with the conditional probability. A high percentage of people flying a combat ship without bothering to do anything to stay alive will die. There, that is basically the same sentence as yours. Can you see the flaw? Dread Red wrote:Spin and play word games if it makes you feel better about your position but everyone playing EVE for longer than a month actually knows the truth, combat ships survive combat better than mining ships. I'd ague it is you who is spinning and playing word games but since we probably cannot agree here why don't we just stop here repeating ourselves and let every reader decide what his/her conclusion is... note: removed parts of quotes for readability purposes. A feeble attempt at a straw man argument, up is down.... down is up, see if I switch it around my point is made. Can you see the flaw? lol I have no more time for pew pew trolls you are dismissed.
|
Dread Red
16
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 18:01:03 -
[1059] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:... you do understand i'm an industrial pilot right? Will the member corps of your Alliance, mr. diplomat, be as giddy about putting their Orcas in a tight target ball as you seem to be? Seems like some of your alliance corp members advertise Orca support as something they offer to entice membership. Perhaps you should take a poll and show them which side you support on the forums, and see how that works out.
Perhaps they have some concerns you have yet to articulate here.
|
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team
152
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 19:43:54 -
[1060] - Quote
Dread Red wrote:In combat like the aforesaid "Widow jumping into a fight", his words not just mine, he would have a fifty fifty chance perhaps of beating another combat ship he chose to jump into a fight against. Of course if he chose to attack a cruiser in his rookie ship I'd say he will lose almost all of them, but we are not talking about brain challenged pilots ok.
Spin and play word games if it makes you feel better about your position but everyone playing EVE for longer than a month actually knows the truth, combat ships survive combat better than mining ships.
Actually, I would argue you are talking about challenged pilots. They pick the wrong hull for the job, just like your rookie ship example. They often fit it wrong on top of that. Then they pay no attention to their ship, or even the game.
A Widow that fits pure damage and ecm with no tank, torpedoes against a small ship, jumps in, activates modules and walks away from the computer does not have a "good chance of winning the fight". Surprise, neither does the miner who does the same.
Mining ships of pilots that are not brain challenged as you put it, are selected fit and piloted with the potential of combat in mind. Those ships are not the flying death traps you describe. Regardless, this is not the thread to complain about your Hulk getting suicide ganked in High Sec.
Demortis wrote: Your posts are backwards my friend yes a miner boosters has about 100 times more risk going out in this upgrade there ship is worth 2Bn and your combat fighter is what 100M to be fair. Come on think a bit before posting we are not talking procurers here we are talking the changes they are proposing to make to our boosters the big isk items in the game. Next time you post think about what your saying it's getting lame.
100 mil buys you a T1 Battlecruiser fitted. You are actually talking about the equivalent of a procurer here, which costs half that.
A combat fit Widow, which is what he was referring to, will easily cost the same or more than a Rorqual. This is a billion isk hull that is almost always faction/deadspace fit. If you are selling them for 100mil each, I'll buy them all. A platinum insured Widow also pays out a net of 200mil. Your uninsured Rorqual pays out a billion isk straight into your wallet when you lose it. |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
17973
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 20:09:34 -
[1061] - Quote
Man, if some of these guys put half the energy into watching local and intel channels, rolling wormholes and planting drag bubbles that they invest in wailing that not doing these things means they get ganked all the time, then mineral prices would crash and 2nd hand ORE BPOs would be going for pennies on the ISK.
Perhaps it's as well. Sometimes when I've had a hard day at work I like to chill out with a bit of mining, and, just ike it's safer to take a slow fat friend when you go lion-watching, they're the kind of competition I prefer.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3002
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 00:50:21 -
[1062] - Quote
Dread Red wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:... you do understand i'm an industrial pilot right? Will the member corps of your Alliance, mr. diplomat, be as giddy about putting their Orcas in a tight target ball as you seem to be? Seems like some of your alliance corp members advertise Orca support as something they offer to entice membership. Perhaps you should take a poll and show them which side you support on the forums, and see how that works out. Perhaps they have some concerns you have yet to articulate here.
yes most of them are excited about it because so many that have trained orca now have a reason to use it not to mention the base buff to the boosts
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Harold Mach
Akimamur Industries The Revenant Order
1
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 09:00:57 -
[1063] - Quote
The consensus from my CEO and Roqual pilots is that we will NOT be taking the Roqual's on grid ever, the risk vs. the isk per hr gained is not worth it. Period end of discussion, not going to happen. That leaves the Roqual sitting at the POS or citadel running compression jobs, not really worth it. Now Orcas, CAN and do get brought on grid for the use of hauling the ores for a squad worth of miners, that job can be handled by a cloaked industrial that makes constant runs to the station/POS/Citadel., but the Orca's better due to larger cargo, fewer trips to unload, might need two pilots if using industrials.
So that brings us down to the new BC sized and destroyer sized boosters, I'm thinking you will see command destroyers on grid in high sec if there is any booster at all. Low sec and null are where you will see orcas and Roquals due to all the blues and scouts for advance warning. Worm hole will not have much booster usage.
Net result will be a net reduction in boosted mining in high sec. ABC minerals will become cheaper in relation to the high sec ores. Highsec gankers will NOT get a lot of nice killmails from ganking roquals, instead the highsec miners will sell, hanger queen, or scrap their roquals. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3005
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 09:07:22 -
[1064] - Quote
i'm sorry but there will plenty of people bringing orcas to belts in considering there already is a bunch of ppl who put orcas in belts. People put freighters in belts and they get comparable tanks in fact an orca can get a better tank than some freighters... and that is assuming the freighters are tanked
so maybe its not that these things are to risky but you and your corp are too risk averse
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Ginger Naari
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 09:18:39 -
[1065] - Quote
Harold Mach wrote: The consensus from my CEO and Roqual pilots is that we will NOT be taking the Roqual's on grid ever, the risk vs. the isk per hr gained is not worth it. Period end of discussion, not going to happen. That leaves the Roqual sitting at the POS or citadel running compression jobs, not really worth it. Now Orcas, CAN and do get brought on grid for the use of hauling the ores for a squad worth of miners, that job can be handled by a cloaked industrial that makes constant runs to the station/POS/Citadel., but the Orca's better due to larger cargo, fewer trips to unload, might need two pilots if using industrials.
So that brings us down to the new BC sized and destroyer sized boosters, I'm thinking you will see command destroyers on grid in high sec if there is any booster at all. Low sec and null are where you will see orcas and Roquals due to all the blues and scouts for advance warning. Worm hole will not have much booster usage.
Net result will be a net reduction in boosted mining in high sec. ABC minerals will become cheaper in relation to the high sec ores. Highsec gankers will NOT get a lot of nice killmails from ganking roquals, instead the highsec miners will sell, hanger queen, or scrap their roquals.
You do realise that a Rorqual can't be used in high sec? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
17993
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 09:24:07 -
[1066] - Quote
Harold Mach wrote: The consensus from my CEO and Roqual pilots is that we will NOT be taking the Roqual's on grid ever, the risk vs. the isk per hr gained is not worth it. Period end of discussion, not going to happen. That leaves the Roqual sitting at the POS or citadel running compression jobs, not really worth it. Now Orcas, CAN and do get brought on grid for the use of hauling the ores for a squad worth of miners, that job can be handled by a cloaked industrial that makes constant runs to the station/POS/Citadel., but the Orca's better due to larger cargo, fewer trips to unload, might need two pilots if using industrials.
So that brings us down to the new BC sized and destroyer sized boosters, I'm thinking you will see command destroyers on grid in high sec if there is any booster at all. Low sec and null are where you will see orcas and Roquals due to all the blues and scouts for advance warning. Worm hole will not have much booster usage.
Net result will be a net reduction in boosted mining in high sec. ABC minerals will become cheaper in relation to the high sec ores. Highsec gankers will NOT get a lot of nice killmails from ganking roquals, instead the highsec miners will sell, hanger queen, or scrap their roquals.
Tell us more about how you were boosting your HIGH SEC mining operations with a Rorqual.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
17993
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 09:24:55 -
[1067] - Quote
Ginger Naari wrote:Harold Mach wrote: The consensus from my CEO and Roqual pilots is that we will NOT be taking the Roqual's on grid ever, the risk vs. the isk per hr gained is not worth it. Period end of discussion, not going to happen. That leaves the Roqual sitting at the POS or citadel running compression jobs, not really worth it. Now Orcas, CAN and do get brought on grid for the use of hauling the ores for a squad worth of miners, that job can be handled by a cloaked industrial that makes constant runs to the station/POS/Citadel., but the Orca's better due to larger cargo, fewer trips to unload, might need two pilots if using industrials.
So that brings us down to the new BC sized and destroyer sized boosters, I'm thinking you will see command destroyers on grid in high sec if there is any booster at all. Low sec and null are where you will see orcas and Roquals due to all the blues and scouts for advance warning. Worm hole will not have much booster usage.
Net result will be a net reduction in boosted mining in high sec. ABC minerals will become cheaper in relation to the high sec ores. Highsec gankers will NOT get a lot of nice killmails from ganking roquals, instead the highsec miners will sell, hanger queen, or scrap their roquals. You do realise that a Rorqual can't be used in high sec?
I think perhaps he was hoping that we didn't.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3005
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 09:35:33 -
[1068] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Ginger Naari wrote:Harold Mach wrote: The consensus from my CEO and Roqual pilots is that we will NOT be taking the Roqual's on grid ever, the risk vs. the isk per hr gained is not worth it. Period end of discussion, not going to happen. That leaves the Roqual sitting at the POS or citadel running compression jobs, not really worth it. Now Orcas, CAN and do get brought on grid for the use of hauling the ores for a squad worth of miners, that job can be handled by a cloaked industrial that makes constant runs to the station/POS/Citadel., but the Orca's better due to larger cargo, fewer trips to unload, might need two pilots if using industrials.
So that brings us down to the new BC sized and destroyer sized boosters, I'm thinking you will see command destroyers on grid in high sec if there is any booster at all. Low sec and null are where you will see orcas and Roquals due to all the blues and scouts for advance warning. Worm hole will not have much booster usage.
Net result will be a net reduction in boosted mining in high sec. ABC minerals will become cheaper in relation to the high sec ores. Highsec gankers will NOT get a lot of nice killmails from ganking roquals, instead the highsec miners will sell, hanger queen, or scrap their roquals. You do realise that a Rorqual can't be used in high sec? I think perhaps he was hoping that we didn't.
maybe he really has just never used one... and considering he doesn't even think ppl wil bring orcas to belts maybe he hasn't even used one of those?
Citadel worm hole tax
|
GROUND XERO
Rennfeuer Project.Mayhem.
4
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 10:00:48 -
[1069] - Quote
1. Command ships are COMMAND ships ...they should be top in all stats ...so why are there any ship give a greater range on link effects??? 2. Why should the super and titan blobbers get extra bonuses ..... is it an ncpl thinngy? so the super blobb will just become stronger??? 3. If the boni are not passiv any more but active ammo ****** things why are these skills not worth to refound??? because one alt is getting useless?
Why did you not just leave everything like it is but force boosters onto the grid????
No clue what these changes are meant for but they are kind of crap!
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3005
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 10:09:14 -
[1070] - Quote
GROUND XERO wrote:1. Command ships are COMMAND ships ...they should be top in all stats ...so why are there any ship give a greater range on link effects??? 2. Why should the super and titan blobbers get extra bonuses ..... is it an ncpl thinngy? so the super blobb will just become stronger??? 3. If the boni are not passiv any more but active ammo ****** things why are these skills not worth to refound??? because one alt is getting useless?
Why did you not just leave everything like it is but force boosters onto the grid????
No clue what these changes are meant for but they are kind of crap!
1 command ships still give the best boosts they can also move faster than the capitals
2 titans are loosing their passive boost this isn't "extra its a replacement"
3 no idea why they are not just scripts... ccp feel ice prices are to low?
4? because this opens up a larger dynamic and gives a reason to use the different boosting ships available as well as a reason to have more than one of a link on field should you chose.
5? these changes are to add more game play to what used to be just a passive alt mechanic over all it is a good change
Citadel worm hole tax
|
|
Trinkets friend
Empty Vessels
3033
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 10:23:37 -
[1071] - Quote
I riek! I riek very much!
My thoughts
~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
17995
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 10:26:31 -
[1072] - Quote
GROUND XERO wrote:1. Command ships are COMMAND ships ...they should be top in all stats ...so why are there any ship give a greater range on link effects??? 2. Why should the super and titan blobbers get extra bonuses ..... is it an ncpl thinngy? so the super blobb will just become stronger??? 3. If the boni are not passiv any more but active ammo ****** things why are these skills not worth to refound??? because one alt is getting useless?
Why did you not just leave everything like it is but force boosters onto the grid????
No clue what these changes are meant for but they are kind of crap!
NB: The plural of "bonus" is 'bonuses'
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/bonus?s=t
A bonus isn't a hippopotamus, and it's plural doesn't look like one either.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
GROUND XERO
Rennfeuer Project.Mayhem.
4
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 10:31:52 -
[1073] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:GROUND XERO wrote:1. Command ships are COMMAND ships ...they should be top in all stats ...so why are there any ship give a greater range on link effects??? 2. Why should the super and titan blobbers get extra bonuses ..... is it an ncpl thinngy? so the super blobb will just become stronger??? 3. If the boni are not passiv any more but active ammo ****** things why are these skills not worth to refound??? because one alt is getting useless?
Why did you not just leave everything like it is but force boosters onto the grid????
No clue what these changes are meant for but they are kind of crap!
NB: The plural of "bonus" is 'bonuses' http://www.dictionary.com/browse/bonus?s=t A bonus isn't a hippopotamus, and it's plural doesn't look like one either.
thx
|
GROUND XERO
Rennfeuer Project.Mayhem.
4
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 10:39:33 -
[1074] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:GROUND XERO wrote:1. Command ships are COMMAND ships ...they should be top in all stats ...so why are there any ship give a greater range on link effects??? 2. Why should the super and titan blobbers get extra bonuses ..... is it an ncpl thinngy? so the super blobb will just become stronger??? 3. If the boni are not passiv any more but active ammo ****** things why are these skills not worth to refound??? because one alt is getting useless?
Why did you not just leave everything like it is but force boosters onto the grid????
No clue what these changes are meant for but they are kind of crap!
1 command ships still give the best boosts they can also move faster than the capitals 2 titans are loosing their passive boost this isn't "extra its a replacement" 3 no idea why they are not just scripts... ccp feel ice prices are to low? 4? because this opens up a larger dynamic and gives a reason to use the different boosting ships available as well as a reason to have more than one of a link on field should you chose. 5? these changes are to add more game play to what used to be just a passive alt mechanic over all it is a good change
1. But the range is less than carriers or? 2. The extra buff for Titans is a huge thing for the Titan super blobbs.... so even if it is replacing the passiv bonuses ( correct this time?) 4-5. Why is it more gameplay when have this boots compared to an ongrid booster? You have to man this ship and fly it and can-Št alt sitter it anyway? Because you have to reload the booster ammo? or to keep in range of your fleet? ...to shine as an elite pilot? |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3005
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 10:50:56 -
[1075] - Quote
1 yes carriers are slower no? and they are a full 10% weaker
2 no clue will have to see final numbers and how they are used to early to tell
4-5 yes? those would all count as more gameplay than just tucking it in deadspace and maybe moving it if your probbed
Citadel worm hole tax
|
GROUND XERO
Rennfeuer Project.Mayhem.
4
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 11:03:27 -
[1076] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:1 yes carriers are slower no? and they are a full 10% weaker
2 no clue will have to see final numbers and how they are used to early to tell
4-5 yes? those would all count as more gameplay than just tucking it in deadspace and maybe moving it if your probbed
1. and still nothing should be stronger in strength and range than a command ship! 2. it is written in stone allready 4.-5. by just forcing the booster onto grid you would have got same without benefiting the Titan super blob! |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3005
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 11:10:59 -
[1077] - Quote
1 why? already there are ships that can boost with more utility and currently there is no reason to put a link on a carrier/fax
2 nothing ccp does is written in stone don't be dramatic
4-5 no the fleet positioning/darting on and of grid/need for multiple boosters would not have been there in nearly the same way. if they just forced them on grid you could do what boosters do now when forced on grid. sit there look pretty make sure not to get out of RR range
Citadel worm hole tax
|
GROUND XERO
Rennfeuer Project.Mayhem.
4
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 12:17:17 -
[1078] - Quote
4-5 no the fleet positioning/darting on and of grid/need for multiple boosters would not have been there in nearly the same way. if they just forced them on grid you could do what boosters do now when forced on grid. sit there look pretty make sure not to get out of RR range[/quote]
If you are forced onto the grid it will need more than look pretty .... and even more if there are range limits ... the only thing more is to reload! You allready need 1x fleet booster + 1 for each wing so at leat 6 for a full fleet so i still don-Št see the increase of fun .... but i might be blind in this case!
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3005
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 12:23:19 -
[1079] - Quote
i can see this being much better and for one thing it will be harder for alts to do it meaning players who want to fill the buffer role can do it now even if they don't have max skills
be nice if it wasn't so hard to fit a T1 booster too :/
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Troubled Basterd
Island Life Capitalist Bastards Chained Reactions
10
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 12:23:52 -
[1080] - Quote
Marauders in higher clas wormholes are ****** as wel. No refitting and needing to fit even more tank becaus of the lack of boosts is making the marauder usles in my opinion.
Marauders have the tank advantage over other ships, thats wy its fun to drop them on to a (small) fleet. Links are wat make and break this. Not having links wil result in less solo marauder pvp. Thats a shame.
Pleas make the links ongrit, not close range. I do agree that an unscannable claymore aint fair. Thats wy i have a maxed out unscannable claymore alt.
o/,
Tb. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |