Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
3047
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 02:52:30 -
[31] - Quote
gold for you wrote:in which anti-gankers ask for even more buffs after receiving a ~40% buff to all freighter EHP less than a year ago. Fittings. Fittings was the buff. The buff was choices. Not the potential increase in EHP if you fit the freighter for tank.
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
Tarn Kugisa
Deaf Eaters Shadow of xXDEATHXx
557
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 04:09:30 -
[32] - Quote
Merin Ryskin wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I agree, capsules should not give out security hits for ECM, weapon disruption, or sensor dampening. Why not? If you warp scramble a ship with WCS fitted and it warps off immediately you still take the sec status hit. If you tracking disrupt a ship with no turrets fitted you still take the sec status hit. If you fire at a ship that is well out of range and impossible to hit you still take the sec status hit. Failure to make an effective attack does not change the fact that you used an aggressive module against a target that you do not have permission to engage.
there's a difference between affecting a ship's system that doesn't exist, and affecting a ship's system that doesn't impair it
Be polite.
Be efficient.
Have a plan to troll everyone you meet
--áKuroVolt
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
257
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 04:30:24 -
[33] - Quote
Tarn Kugisa wrote:there's a difference between affecting a ship's system that doesn't exist, and affecting a ship's system that doesn't impair it
A tracking disruptor activated against a ship with no turrets is affecting a system that doesn't exist, and yet you still take the sec status penalty for it if you try to tracking disrupt a Drake that you can't legally attack. The tracking disruptor, like ECM bursts, is classified as an aggressive module and all that matters is whether or not the ship you activate it against is a legal target for you.
The only reason anyone thinks the rules need to change is this bizarre idea that gankers are "bad" and anti-gankers are "good", and so the white knights shouldn't have to pay the same penalties as the rest of us as long as their choice of target is a "bad" player. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3249
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:20:49 -
[34] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:gold for you wrote:in which anti-gankers ask for even more buffs after receiving a ~40% buff to all freighter EHP less than a year ago. Fittings. Fittings was the buff. The buff was choices. Not the potential increase in EHP if you fit the freighter for tank.
They installed a ghetto damage control on all freighter for free recently. That was a direct EHP boost no? |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
3048
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 03:54:43 -
[35] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:gold for you wrote:in which anti-gankers ask for even more buffs after receiving a ~40% buff to all freighter EHP less than a year ago. Fittings. Fittings was the buff. The buff was choices. Not the potential increase in EHP if you fit the freighter for tank. They installed a ghetto damage control on all freighter for free recently. That was a direct EHP boost no? You're right, I forgot about that one.
Two buffs, one was fitting.
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |