EVE Search - Solution for Curse and Pilgrim:

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Solution for Curse and Pilgrim:

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.03 12:04:00 - [31] Edited by: Aramendel on 03/08/2007 12:07:55 Originally by: Grytok They simply also shouldn't, but they're HACs and no Recons, so OK, my bad by using the word "Cruisers". So HACs are not 2 classes smaller? Or do require more training? Oh wait... Originally by: Grytok Yeah, and the Curse can Neutralize big potions of Cap and has Bonus' to use TD's to disable GunBoats. The cap neut ability is, as said, pretty pointless in med gang and bigger and both damps and ECM are a better disabler of everything, including turret ships, than TDs are vs turret ships. The curse is a weaker gangship than the other recons, what do you think balances that? Originally by: Grytok But it stands as it is anyway. There should not be any kind of SoloPWN-Mobile in a MMO! There isn't. The curse cannot do much against frigates and destroyers, it cannot catch & tackle them. Thats the huginns job, it is a small ship specialist. The curse is a big ship specialist with a focus on disableing BSs and BCs.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.08.03 12:09:00 - [32] Originally by: LvxOccvlta Edited by: LvxOccvlta on 03/08/2007 00:00:31 In light of CCP's proposed NOS nerf.. I have an idea that can save the forsaken Amarr recons: Give the Curse and Pilgrim an insane bonus that drastically decreases cap usage for activating Neuts. Problem solved. What do you think? \/\/\/ Thanks for your constructive input, troll. Moved from General Discussion to Ships and Modules -Eldo ([email protected]) I think thats the thing that makes it practically invulnerable with a damp setup. Best just live with its new found mortality and give your targets a chance.
Queen Hopy Your Friendly Booster Company	Posted - 2007.08.03 12:19:00 - [33] Originally by: Xequecal Originally by: Grytok 2x Neutralizer on a Curse use 240 Energy to kill 660 Cap at the target. Now you shoot in 1x CapBooster 800 and you've enough Cap to run your MWD to stay at 30km range. So where's the problem exactly? If you're whining, because you can't solo a BS in your Curse, then I got some news for you: No Cruiser should be able to do that, beeing 2 classes smaller! Ishtar and Vagabond can solo battleships easily. Why not the Curse? A vagabond cant solo a battleship if the battleship happens to have some nos or neuts. The curse in its present form cant be countered with nos nor neut.
Grytok German Kings OPUS Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.03 12:45:00 - [34] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 03/08/2007 12:07:55 Originally by: Grytok They simply also shouldn't, but they're HACs and no Recons, so OK, my bad by using the word "Cruisers". So HACs are not 2 classes smaller? Or do require more training? Oh wait... Originally by: Grytok Yeah, and the Curse can Neutralize big potions of Cap and has Bonus' to use TD's to disable GunBoats. The cap neut ability is, as said, pretty pointless in med gang and bigger and both damps and ECM are a better disabler of everything, including turret ships, than TDs are vs turret ships. The curse is a weaker gangship than the other recons, what do you think balances that? Originally by: Grytok But it stands as it is anyway. There should not be any kind of SoloPWN-Mobile in a MMO! There isn't. The curse cannot do much against frigates and destroyers, it cannot catch & tackle them. Thats the huginns job, it is a small ship specialist. The curse is a big ship specialist with a focus on disableing BSs and BCs. The Curse is balanced by helping to disable a target, by destroying Cap. Therefore it can use Neutralizers pretty effective. Helping to disable BC and BS is OK, but soloing BC or BS is not in such a ship. Try to solo a BC/BS in an Arazu You'd not be able to break their tank, simply by not having enough firepower. Any BC/BS can tank 200/250 DPS (before Resistances), when it's not NOSsed to death. So there you got your Curse, fulfilling exactly the intended role, killing the BC/BS ability to tank. .
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.03 12:52:00 - [35] Edited by: Aramendel on 03/08/2007 12:53:23 To repeat myself yet again: Its ability of killing cap is pretty much USELESS in medium or bigger gangs. Targets die before their cap is dry. The curse is - unlike the other recons - not very effective there. No, a lachesis (the arazu is the equivalent to the pilgrim, not the curse) cannot solo a BS. However a curse neither cannot tackle something from 48k or disable targets instantly with equal efficiency. And does also only 230 dps compared to the lachesis 330 dps. For you to ignore once again: The curse has disadvantages in bigger gangs compared to the other recons. What does make up for that?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.03 13:21:00 - [36] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Goumindong It already does. A best named medium neut drains 30 cap/second and costs 9.3 cap/second on a Curse with top skills. Small neuts will cost 6 cap and drain 18 cap per second.[faction is 7.5/20] That is a pretty huge reduction. Not when you compare the cap size & recharge of the curse vs other ships, especially BSs and BCs. Vs battleships the curse kills even with max skills a bigger percentage of it's own cap by using a neut than the percentage it kills of them. It is good vs other cruisers and below, but frankly there are more efficient ships to counter these than the curse. If that is the case then a single NOS counters that.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.03 13:46:00 - [37] Originally by: Goumindong If that is the case then a single NOS counters that. Jepp. But vs a single target you hit a stonewall at around 30%. You need almost the complete native caprecharge of a curse or pilgrim to power EW + scram, so unless you want to run out of cap and have no scram and no EW anymore you cannot bring your target much lower. Bringing a target to its peak recharge is not exactly doing much. The point is that higher efficiency of the amarr recons with neuts is essentially countered by their smaller cap.
volly Amarr SteelVipers YouWhat	Posted - 2007.08.03 13:57:00 - [38] Originally by: umop 3pisdn oh noes my overpowered pwnboat got downgraded, oh wells its still good, just going to require a small degree of skill now Ok just to "balance" the other recons: Hugin: Can¦t slow down the target Ship lower than it¦s own speed, Can¦t paint target Ship bigger than it¦s own sig radius Lachesis Can¦t dampen target Ship Scan Resoulution and Targeting range lower than own Sounds fair ok?
Borasao	Posted - 2007.08.03 14:46:00 - [39] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 03/08/2007 12:54:36 To repeat myself yet again: Its ability of killing cap is pretty much USELESS in medium or bigger gangs. Targets die before their cap is dry. The curse is - unlike the other recons - not very effective there. So... the ability to kill cap is pretty much useless in medium or bigger gangs ganking solo targets because solo targets die before the cap is drained... we understand that... If the medium gang is up against another medium gang, the Curse can effectively use TDs to disable the guns on some of the flagships and use the NOS/NEUT to disable tacklers while its gang pops the flagships in the rival gang. That's just one quick idea... there are other ways to use a Curse in gangs as well when you aren't ganking solo targets.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.03 14:53:00 - [40] Originally by: Borasao Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 03/08/2007 12:54:36 To repeat myself yet again: Its ability of killing cap is pretty much USELESS in medium or bigger gangs. Targets die before their cap is dry. The curse is - unlike the other recons - not very effective there. So... the ability to kill cap is pretty much useless in medium or bigger gangs ganking solo targets because solo targets die before the cap is drained... we understand that... If the medium gang is up against another medium gang, the Curse can effectively use TDs to disable the guns on some of the flagships and use the NOS/NEUT to disable tacklers while its gang pops the flagships in the rival gang. That's just one quick idea... there are other ways to use a Curse in gangs as well when you aren't ganking solo targets. Nos is powerful because it disables a targets tank. You do not need a dedicated nos boat to disable tacklers. A single RSD or heavy neut from a battleship will do that.
PhantomVyper Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.08.03 14:58:00 - [41] Edited by: PhantomVyper on 03/08/2007 15:04:32 too late...
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:13:00 - [42] Edited by: Aramendel on 03/08/2007 16:16:15 Originally by: Goumindong Nos is powerful because it disables a targets tank. You do not need a dedicated nos boat to disable tacklers. A single RSD or heavy neut from a battleship will do that. ed: I dont think the problem is going to be as pronounced as some people make it, but it certianly will be harder to keep up with. Maybe if the Curse had a dedicated recharge based buddy to suck from this would change, who knows. That. It will by no means useless, however both a huginn and lachesis can do the same thing, and better. The curse will neither be more or less unusable after the change like the pilgrim will be in its current state, but it will be weaker, and IMO on average less efficient than the other recons. In short: curse = weaker, possibly slightly too weak compared to the other combat recons pilgrim = broken
Monique Balthur	Posted - 2007.08.03 17:32:00 - [43] Originally by: volly Originally by: umop 3pisdn oh noes my overpowered pwnboat got downgraded, oh wells its still good, just going to require a small degree of skill now Ok just to "balance" the other recons: Hugin: Can¦t slow down the target Ship lower than it¦s own speed, Can¦t paint target Ship bigger than it¦s own sig radius Lachesis Can¦t dampen target Ship Scan Resoulution and Targeting range lower than own Sounds fair ok? yeahs !
ChimeraRouge Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2007.08.03 18:53:00 - [44] Originally by: LvxOccvlta Edited by: LvxOccvlta on 03/08/2007 00:00:31 In light of CCP's proposed NOS nerf.. I have an idea that can save the forsaken Amarr recons: Give the Curse and Pilgrim an insane bonus that drastically decreases cap usage for activating Neuts. Problem solved. What do you think? \/\/\/ Thanks for your constructive input, troll. Moved from General Discussion to Ships and Modules -Eldo ([email protected]) No this ship should not get anymore bonuses it's already overpowered and after the nerf will be even more powerful with neuts! The curse/pilgrim are cruisers and should not be able to solo anything larger than a ship of the same size. Being able to kill bc's and bs's is not what one would call balance. It's a support ship. Those ships still need to be nerfed a little more to balance them out not given more bonuses. FFS.
Clavius XIV Auctoritan Syndicate Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:48:00 - [45] Originally by: ChimeraRouge No this ship should not get anymore bonuses it's already overpowered and after the nerf will be even more powerful with neuts! The curse/pilgrim are cruisers and should not be able to solo anything larger than a ship of the same size. Being able to kill bc's and bs's is not what one would call balance. It's a support ship. #1 Neuts aren't getting changed, ergo fitting neuts on an existing curse (you somehow found the grid for them + injector) can be done now, so its not getting more powerful with respect to neuts. I agree they recons are intended to be gang support ships. They are not primairly intented to kill their targets but rather disable them. The curse and pilgrim have the most limited, situational and incomplete disabliing capabilities. As has been pointed out already, the Curse is weakest of the recons for gang support, and this change doesn't help that. Further the Pilgrim due to it's extreme range limitations is a horrible choice for a gang recon. Overall the nos changes are good, but with them, the curse must in effect disable itself to disable its opponsnts. One should be able to run a full rack of medium neutralizers on a curse with the comperable cap efficency as a full rack of jammers on a rook or a full rack of webs on a Huggin. The neutralizing effect either needs to be made considerably more powerful, or the cost of it needs to be lessend on the curse... and in any case the fittings need to be adjusted to be able to fit a full rack of medium neuts, injector, propulsion and armor tank. As for what the Pilgrim needs? I have no clue... if you give it a rangebonus to be useful in gangs, it will have to loose its amount bonus, making it just as pointless.
KD.Fluffy The Refugees	Posted - 2007.08.03 21:02:00 - [46] curse is fine.... You use it at range, neut enemies cap. its no longer the solo own mobile it once was, and I have no problem with that. Use it in combination with a hugin, and a arazu, and it will pretty much gank anything.
DarkElf Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2007.08.03 21:16:00 - [47] Originally by: LvxOccvlta Edited by: LvxOccvlta on 03/08/2007 00:00:31 In light of CCP's proposed NOS nerf.. I have an idea that can save the forsaken Amarr recons: Give the Curse and Pilgrim an insane bonus that drastically decreases cap usage for activating Neuts. Problem solved. What do you think? \/\/\/ Thanks for your constructive input, troll. Moved from General Discussion to Ships and Modules -Eldo ([email protected]) they basically already do. the fact that they cost the pilgrim pilot about a third of what they take is in itself a huge reduction in cost effectively. I think it'll be fine as it is. DE
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.03 21:22:00 - [48] Originally by: Clavius XIV As for what the Pilgrim needs? I have no clue... if you give it a rangebonus to be useful in gangs, it will have to loose its amount bonus, making it just as pointless. Perhaps a mixture of both? Instead a 40% range OR a 20% strength bonus per lvl make it a 20% range and 10% strength bonus?
Kruel Blunt Force Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.03 21:32:00 - [49] Originally by: ChimeraRouge The curse/pilgrim are cruisers and should not be able to solo anything larger than a ship of the same size. Being able to kill bc's and bs's is not what one would call balance. It's a support ship. So your tech1 fully-insurable battleship should be able to easily kill my 350m Curse (without insurance) and much higher required skills? That's not even including the snake set I had to get in order to make the Curse the pwnmobile that it is. That ship better ******* pwn with the kind of isk/training time I put into it, and the amount if isk I risk every time I take it out into battle. Just saying... the argument can go both ways. Just the fact that your ship is bigger doesn't mean it should be better. Personally I'd like that the ships with nos bonuses not be effected by this nos nerf. Then again, Caldari got screwed with the ECM nerf so I'm not counting on getting any special treatment.
Rixsta Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.03 21:50:00 - [50] This is rediculous ... people are still moaning about the curse... you do realise it will still own right? and if it can't... well you just run off... oh boo hoo you had to run from the fight... see now i can understand you *****ing if its ability to nano-up and scoot about was affected ... but you're moaning about one of the most versatile ships in game... you can have a rack of launchers, a rack of Nos, a rack of neuts, a shield tank, armor tank, ew tank, speed tank, cap heavy tank, passive tank ... and it gets a bonus to drones... i fly the pilgrim and curse and i wouldn't dream of moaning like some of you guys... Lets be honest the ability to solo a BS is probably the same ... dominix has been nerfec the most, the curse hasn't been nerfed that much... just changed. I always saw the curse as more of a HAC/support raper, and it should fulfil that role even more now, 3/4 med neuts, 1/2 cycle the neuts and tear their cap a new one ... sit and watch them crumble quicker than before because you're using neuts instead of nos... -------------------------------
Sith Vador	Posted - 2007.08.03 22:12:00 - [51] Originally by: Xequecal Originally by: Grytok 2x Neutralizer on a Curse use 240 Energy to kill 660 Cap at the target. Now you shoot in 1x CapBooster 800 and you've enough Cap to run your MWD to stay at 30km range. So where's the problem exactly? If you're whining, because you can't solo a BS in your Curse, then I got some news for you: No Cruiser should be able to do that, beeing 2 classes smaller! Ishtar and Vagabond can solo battleships easily. Why not the Curse? Not to smack you in the face but vaga's an Ishtar are HAC.. Try comparing them to other recon ships if you wish to validate your argument.
Velox Idolon	Posted - 2007.08.03 22:13:00 - [52] Ideas to fix the potentially overdone nerf on the amarr recons (as i am 5 days out from pilgrim/curse myself): 1) add a low slot module that either reduces neut capacity cost OR... 2)a module that adds a percentage amount which you can drain below your cap amount, mebbe 10% and stacking nerfed so with one fitted if you are at 30% you can drain opponent to 20%, OR... 3) have that effect of 10%/7.5%/5% w/e below own cap built into the curse and pilgrim, that way you can sit at max recharge and just about cause cap death of the opponent discuss....
Sith Vador	Posted - 2007.08.03 22:22:00 - [53] Originally by: Clavius XIV Originally by: ChimeraRouge No this ship should not get anymore bonuses it's already overpowered and after the nerf will be even more powerful with neuts! The curse/pilgrim are cruisers and should not be able to solo anything larger than a ship of the same size. Being able to kill bc's and bs's is not what one would call balance. It's a support ship. #1 Neuts aren't getting changed, ergo fitting neuts on an existing curse (you somehow found the grid for them + injector) can be done now, so its not getting more powerful with respect to neuts. I agree they recons are intended to be gang support ships. They are not primairly intented to kill their targets but rather disable them. The curse and pilgrim have the most limited, situational and incomplete disabliing capabilities. As has been pointed out already, the Curse is weakest of the recons for gang support, and this change doesn't help that. Further the Pilgrim due to it's extreme range limitations is a horrible choice for a gang recon. Overall the nos changes are good, but with them, the curse must in effect disable itself to disable its opponsnts. One should be able to run a full rack of medium neutralizers on a curse with the comperable cap efficency as a full rack of jammers on a rook or a full rack of webs on a Huggin. The neutralizing effect either needs to be made considerably more powerful, or the cost of it needs to be lessend on the curse... and in any case the fittings need to be adjusted to be able to fit a full rack of medium neuts, injector, propulsion and armor tank. As for what the Pilgrim needs? I have no clue... if you give it a rangebonus to be useful in gangs, it will have to loose its amount bonus, making it just as pointless. In respects the curse an pilgrim has the best disabling ablity. Most ships can't fight/move without cap. Even with the NOS changes the Curse will still pwn most BC classed ships an below. Sep now it will have large issues tanking on BS's however with support it's have no problem. Look at the huggin with it's target painting bonus. It's pretty much useless. Something like NOS is now :). But if done right it will still have some good use. It's still not as useless as the minmatar target painting bonus so cheer up. We'll still be able to get some good use out of the ship.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.04 00:46:00 - [54] Originally by: Sith Vador In respects the curse an pilgrim has the best disabling ablity. Most ships can't fight/move without cap. All missiles and projectiles are not in the least hindered by no cap. Most ships in Pvp can also counter that just fine by using injectors. ECM and damps are afar, far more efficient in disabeling ships. Also, you are ignoring 2 points: Firstly, nos/neuts are a delayed disabeling device. It only gets disabeling (and that only partly) when you sucked all cap (and they have no injector). With that argumentation weapons are "disabeling devices" as well, and with fewer limitations. Secondly, in medium or bigger gangs weapons are actually also faster "disabeling devices" since a ship tends to die before you can suck it dry. So, no, curse/pilgrim have not the best disabling ablity, it's not even close. Quote: Look at the huggin with it's target painting bonus. It's pretty much useless. Yes. However longrange webs are extremly useful for any gang. Tracking disruptors are an utter joke compared to that. Nevermind that the most effective curse setups do not use them, which makes a bonus to them about as useful as that for painters.
Nyxus GALAXIAN RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.04 01:49:00 - [55] Quote: In light of CCP's proposed NOS nerf.. I have an idea that can save the forsaken Amarr recons: Give the Curse and Pilgrim an insane bonus that drastically decreases cap usage for activating Neuts. Problem solved. What do you think? I think that what HAS to happen or Curse/Pilgrim will suffer an extreme reduction in effectiveness. Remember, a Curse is really only effective in very small gangs, since in larger ones targets die WAY before thier cap is gone. Reduce thier small gang usefulness and they would need a boost in medium/large gangs to be as effective as an Arazu or Hughinn. Also - since nos are now based on your PERCENTAGE of cap, and the Curse/Pilgrim are dedicated cap warfare boats, they need to get their total capacitor capacity boosted. Somewhere near Command ship/Typhoon would be appropriate since it is their speciality and the point of thier existance. Originally by: Aramendel (in reference to the pilgrim)Instead a 40% range OR a 20% strength bonus per lvl make it a 20% range and 10% strength bonus? YES. The Pilgrim (and the Blood faction ships) need a range boost. Working in web range with a ship as paper thin as a recon is suicide. Thats why all the other recons have range boost to thier ewar. Webs, Disruptors, ECM, all have range boosts to get them out of harms way. Pilgrim and Blood ships need this as well. Nyxus The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships.
Daerious El5engare	Posted - 2007.08.04 03:51:00 - [56] Well. . . .I was 5 days out from Amarr Cruiser 5 when this news came out. I was training an alt I could solo in when my corp was not active etc. 4million SP towards a curse or pilgrim. I always liked the look of Amarr etc and thought a curse/pilgrim would be a way to fly it. So . . . should I still train for this ship? THe only other thing I can think Crusier v is good for is a Guardian; no thank you! Guess there is always the khanid ships - ugh. what should i do with my fledgling Amarr thats about to hit cruiser v?!
Dr Fighter	Posted - 2007.08.04 03:57:00 - [57] Originally by: Daerious El5engare Well. . . .I was 5 days out from Amarr Cruiser 5 when this news came out. I was training an alt I could solo in when my corp was not active etc. 4million SP towards a curse or pilgrim. I always liked the look of Amarr etc and thought a curse/pilgrim would be a way to fly it. So . . . should I still train for this ship? THe only other thing I can think Crusier v is good for is a Guardian; no thank you! Guess there is always the khanid ships - ugh. what should i do with my fledgling Amarr thats about to hit cruiser v?! hacs, put the recons on hold until ccp offer curse pilots a way to not totally suck using nos. zealot and great, and the sac (WAS good for its price) will be great after the next patch
Depp Knight Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.08.04 03:59:00 - [58] Some of you are idiots. First the curse is not overpowered it is however when fitted with faction gear and a set of snake implants. Then it becomes a very very expensive ship. So why cant it be overpowered then. Another point to be taken, the curse's weapon is to drain the hostiles cap and use it for his own. With nos nerf this will change. So now the curse pilot is forced to fit a cap booster which will make it hard to fit, most likely denting its already avg tank so it can do what its suppose to do. Drain the hostiles cap. You know there are better ships than the curse solo, Phoon, Domi, Vaga. The poor amarr race only advantage was the recon ships. Take them away from them and what else do they have waiting for them. They already have some of the weakest bs, the weakest and worse hac in the game. The worst AFs and probably the same can be said about their BC's. Poor poor amarr.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.04 05:06:00 - [59] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Goumindong If that is the case then a single NOS counters that. Jepp. But vs a single target you hit a stonewall at around 30%. You need almost the complete native caprecharge of a curse or pilgrim to power EW + scram, so unless you want to run out of cap and have no scram and no EW anymore you cannot bring your target much lower. Bringing a target to its peak recharge is not exactly doing much. The point is that higher efficiency of the amarr recons with neuts is essentially countered by their smaller cap. Not quite. See. The curse can use the timing of its modules to drain cap. Activate your nos right after the MWD hits and pop you can drain them from 33% to 20% while boosting yourself back up to 33%. Then neut again.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.04 13:05:00 - [60] Originally by: Goumindong Not quite. See. The curse can use the timing of its modules to drain cap. Activate your nos right after the MWD hits and pop you can drain them from 33% to 20% while boosting yourself back up to 33%. Then neut again. Does not work. Lets assume curse vs geddon, both at 30%. Curse has with max skills and MWD 1172 cap. Geddon under same conditions 4980 cap (or 6640 cap without MWD). So, at 30% curse is at 352 cap and geddon at 1494 cap. You activate MWD, which is 149 cap, so you are at 203 cap (17.3%). Two nosses and you are at 347 cap (29.6%) and the geddon at 1350 cap (27.1%). Now a neut and you are 235 cap (20% cap) and the geddon at 1030 cap (20.7%). So you can just about nos him with a single nos, so you will be at 307 cap (26.2%) and the geddon at 958 cap (19.2%). It is a downward spiral and not sustainable. You can keep your cap slightly above that of your target, but not much. And once you get below 25% cap your own peak recharge will not be able to power your scram & EW even at max skills (cap AND prop jamming and base EW skill). The only way to get above that is if your target recharges enough so it has more cap than you and you can nos him. Against a single BS target efficiently you either kill his complete cap and will run out of cap as result or you both will hover around peak recharge.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.