Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates Enuma Elish.
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 15:10:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan Because the ships that use ECM have no means of a viable tank aside from being out a long range.
Thread over.
No no. The thread has moved on. We're not longer on TDs vs. ECMs, and are now on 'how to make TDs worthy modules in a general sense'.
ECMs are IMO are more specialised role of ship - you get an 'ECM ship' that does pretty much nothing but ECMs.
TDs on the other hand, especially on TD ships, are 'support' modules - they support a ship in a fight, but allow it to still 'do stuff'. The question is what's the 'niche' of a TD that allows it to still do this effectively (but without being the 'I must fit this everytime' that a damp was).
Personally, I feel that TDs at 'about' the strength they were, before trinity were 'about' right. And I'll admit that's an entirely subjective impression.
I think that the major reason they weren't used was because damps were just plain better. But now they're maybe not.
Is one ship with a TD actually better off fitting it than something else you could put in that midslot, with approximately the same fittings though?
At the moment, I'd say probably not. TDs are CPU hungry (and TD ships are ammarrian, and thus not great on CPU) and actually, there's lots of stuff to put in a mid that's more useful. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking? GMP and TNP |
Bruce Deorum
Minmatar Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 15:17:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan Because the ships that use ECM have no means of a viable tank aside from being out a long range.
Thread over.
Opting for a full ECM middle rack is a recommended option, not a necessity. Like was fitting a Geddon like "7x Guns + 3x SBs + 8x HS" for all-out dmg before the stacking nerf.
So using all your meds for ewar is neither an abuse, nor one-way option. You can tank ewar ships comperably well if you leave out some ewar modules, but should this be your goal, you would be flying a Maller instead of a Blackbird. I am he, the bornless one
|
Ruciza
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 15:41:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Ruciza on 11/12/2007 15:45:56 A Lachesis can neutralize a Rook at all ranges in an EW duel against each other. A Rook with range rigs wins statistically above 200 km. The lower the distance, the more advantaged the Damp ship is. Without ECCM.
|
Trojanman190
Murder-Death-Kill
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 15:54:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Ruciza Edited by: Ruciza on 11/12/2007 15:45:56 A Lachesis can neutralize a Rook at all ranges in an EW duel against each other. A Rook with range rigs wins statistically above 200 km. The lower the distance, the more advantaged the Damp ship is. Without ECCM.
Thats not completely correct, at close range the rook definitely has the advantage because the lachesis might not be able to damp the rook down low enough, this making his entire ship useless.
ECM is broken because it offers effectiveness from 200km down to 0km. No other ewar can do that. Period. To top that off a single good jam can win a fight, there are tempests on MDK killboard STILL fitting a single multispec because a single close range jam can win a fight. You can TD for an entire fight and have it not get you anywhere. You can TP for an entire fight and have it not matter a bit. You can't damp at extremely long range and its useless, at least at breaking locks, at extreme close range.
Strength is not an issue, and no matter what they do to other ewar something needs to be done about ecm range. ECm strike me as a close range ewar, not a long range one.
Before nerfing anything... boost other stuff. Nerf's suck.
|
General Coochie
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 16:05:00 -
[35]
Instead of nerfing ECM, which is as powerful as I believe EWAR should be. Buff TDs and Damps. Sig removed, lacks Eve-related content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Uninvited Guests Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 16:29:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 11/12/2007 16:30:37
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan Because the ships that use ECM have no means of a viable tank aside from being out a long range.
Thread over.
Uhm wich recon has a tank? They all melt once under gunfire really, even to cruiser/bc dps. You know whats funny? Minmatar recons getting painters. Caldari should be getting painters because they are the missile race.
Imo ecm should go to gallente. Ecm should be very short ranged, inline with gallente close range gank. Target painting should go to caldari because of missiles.
Question is what to do with damps and tds. Imo tds should work on missiles and turrets and be given to minmatar, because they are a fast race that can use the td very well. This would mean damps go to amarr I guess.
Web range ew should be given to caldari and scram range to minmatar. This imo would be alot more logical.
So amarr would have nos/damp Gallente ecm range/str Minmatar new TD/scramble Caldari TP/web
Web range goes to caldari because they are the slowest and webs and TP increase missile damage by alot. Scramble should go to minmatar instead, because it has no where else to go. Gallente already has ecm now. Doesnt make sense that the fastest race has the webber range ew.
Ofc this would need a total redo of many ship designs. So meh.
But the point is, the ew distribution is wacko. Its not just the imbalance between the ew. ---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Matrixcvd
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 16:43:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Trojanman190
Thats not completely correct, at close range the rook definitely has the advantage because the lachesis might not be able to damp the rook down low enough, this making his entire ship useless.
ECM is broken because it offers effectiveness from 200km down to 0km. No other ewar can do that. Period. To top that off a single good jam can win a fight, there are tempests on MDK killboard STILL fitting a single multispec because a single close range jam can win a fight. You can TD for an entire fight and have it not get you anywhere. You can TP for an entire fight and have it not matter a bit. You can't damp at extremely long range and its useless, at least at breaking locks, at extreme close range.
Strength is not an issue, and no matter what they do to other ewar something needs to be done about ecm range. ECm strike me as a close range ewar, not a long range one.
Before nerfing anything... boost other stuff. Nerf's suck.
ok... i puke... nothing needs nerfing and nothing needs changing.... Sitting here and drawing up head to head competitions between a force and a combat recon is just lunacy you guys are going to hurt yourselves... These types of competitions don't generally happen. Look its this simple, if you get engaged at a gate and the opponenets friends show up and jam you, you die, enough is enough, A well fitted punisher could kill a drake but you don't see punishers getting nerfed, oh wait amarr... yeah... anyways...
To continue, look you guys need a lesson on PVP, in small gang, who cares if the ECM works at all ranges, this is like arguing the carrier is the jack of all trades, if the ECM ship is close in it dies cause the other FC will call it primary and kill it. JUST BECAUSE IT CAN JAM AT 0KM DOES NOT MAKE IT EFFECTIVE OR SMART TO DO! 1v1 competitions are bogus because to be effective at ECM you give up med slots, so thats no webber and no scrammy, and even if you had that, you got no damage, so if your in these types of ships your killing stupid frigates and thats fine.
The more i read the forums the more i get distraught at the lack of contextual understanding, sure look up the stats, use EFT, get killed, get mad, go to the forums, cry nerf. But man, you guys need to get out of the starbase, and fly a bit... i am done i can't take anymore
|
ChimeraRouge
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 16:55:00 -
[38]
Originally by: General Coochie Instead of nerfing ECM, which is as powerful as I believe EWAR should be. Buff TDs and Damps.
no td and damp ships have many other ways to defend themselves.
|
Zanarkand
Gallente Enterprise Estonia
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 17:00:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Zanarkand on 11/12/2007 17:02:30 100% agree, I can't see the reason for having that big range advantage...
|
Rialtor
Amarr Yarrrateers
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 17:10:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Rialtor on 11/12/2007 17:11:36 The point of missles is to be effectively EWAR proof. For jamming and damps they have FoF, TDs don't effect them. So you can't make TDs effect them because it's not the nature of missles to be effected in that manner. Missles have other negative aspects to make up for this.
TDs are more effective in solo combat than ECM, so it's not all around better. To run TDs all you need is a bonused ship with like 2 tds. ECM is a much bigger investement.
But ECM is suppose to be the best ECM, and Caldari are suppose to be the ECM race. So I don't think it's right to take it away from them, last I checked Caldari wasn't a big PvP race. Seek balancing of the game, not individual portions of it. I haven't fought against the buffed ECM yet, but I thought it was fine before the patch, didn't see a need for the Buff really.
---- sig ----
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world... Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has. |
|
Carth Reynolds
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 17:13:00 -
[41]
I'd say that there most of the TD boosts mentioned here are pretty good ideas and I have nothing to contribute on that front.
On the ECM front however, I would like to point out that ECM WAS nerfed pretty hard awhile back. If i'm not mistaken it went from "each module stacked with the others and if you beat their sensor strength you jam indefinitely" to "each module has it's own chance when compared with the enemy sensor strength". As far as the range issue goes, everyone has already pointed out that dedicated ECM ships have no real ability to defend themselves when the hate and discontent starts flying, thus the only way to stay alive is to stay far far away from the blaster spraying death mobiles.
|
Derek Sigres
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 17:16:00 -
[42]
I'd say that there most of the TD boosts mentioned here are pretty good ideas and I have nothing to contribute on that front.
On the ECM front however, I would like to point out that ECM WAS nerfed pretty hard awhile back. If i'm not mistaken it went from "each module stacked with the others and if you beat their sensor strength you jam indefinitely" to "each module has it's own chance when compared with the enemy sensor strength". As far as the range issue goes, everyone has already pointed out that dedicated ECM ships have no real ability to defend themselves when the hate and discontent starts flying, thus the only way to stay alive is to stay far far away from the blaster spraying death mobiles.
|
Rialtor
Amarr Yarrrateers
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 17:21:00 -
[43]
All in all I think the script change was a boost to TDs. on TDs really only the tracking mod was used. So in essence, all other EW was hit harder (besides ECM). So comparatively TDs aren't looking too bad.
---- sig ----
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world... Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has. |
Ezekiel Sulastin
Gallente Brute Strength
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 17:36:00 -
[44]
Originally by: ChimeraRouge
Originally by: General Coochie Instead of nerfing ECM, which is as powerful as I believe EWAR should be. Buff TDs and Damps.
no td and damp ships have many other ways to defend themselves.
Like what? Reprocessing themselves? A smattering of drones that do little DPS anyways? A couple missiles?
Dampening ships have been usurped in the ewar role by ECM, and are deprecated in the tackler role. Few people even USED TDs on the Amarr recons - and their NOS and drones got busted up too.
|
Gawain Hill
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 17:59:00 -
[45]
i know i know :D what we do is make ecm ONLY work against missile ships
then we have
Tracking disrupters = Gun boats ECM = Missile boats Damps = a usable all rounder
problem solved :) and don't anyone say "no one files missile boats in PvP" cause that's bull it's just people don't fly them in Large gangs or fleets solo and small gangs missile boats work fine and shield tanks work fine in gangs and not solo
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates Enuma Elish.
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 18:04:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin
Originally by: ChimeraRouge
Originally by: General Coochie Instead of nerfing ECM, which is as powerful as I believe EWAR should be. Buff TDs and Damps.
no td and damp ships have many other ways to defend themselves.
Like what? Reprocessing themselves? A smattering of drones that do little DPS anyways? A couple missiles?
Dampening ships have been usurped in the ewar role by ECM, and are deprecated in the tackler role. Few people even USED TDs on the Amarr recons - and their NOS and drones got busted up too.
* All the recons have lowslots to fit tanks in. ECM ones fit SDAs
* you may consider the dronebay on the arazu pitiful, but really, have you seen how much damage the falcon does? The dronebay alone on the arazu is >100dps.
* No one used TDs, because everyone was using damps instead. This would seem to suggest that _either_ tds were underpowered, or damps were overpowered.
* Dampening ships have not been usurped by ECM. It remains the case that RSDs are better on a module-for-module basis at removing specific ships from a fight. ECMs are better at removing multiple ships out of a still larger group. This IS UNCHANGED.
* Arazu/Lachesis can still warp scramble a ship at the same time of being able to reliably prevent them returning fire. And doing useful amounts of damage at the same time. Deprecated they ain't.
* At sniper ranges, damps remain a good solid choice - their 'chance based' due to being in falloff, trades off very well for needing significantly less 'net reduction' to prevent being lockable.
* We are not talking about damps, this is a TDs thread. TDs _were_ ok before, it was damps that were too powerful. Now both have been nerfbatted in a similar fashion, this leaves us in the same situation. TDs need a boost. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking? GMP and TNP |
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates Enuma Elish.
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 18:07:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Rialtor All in all I think the script change was a boost to TDs. on TDs really only the tracking mod was used. So in essence, all other EW was hit harder (besides ECM). So comparatively TDs aren't looking too bad.
Not entirely true. I found the optimal reduction very useful. However it was against different ships, in different tactical situations. SO in a sense, you are correct - you don't generally need to do both at the same time.
Damps on the other hand, it meant that you knocked their locking range right down. ANd then they got close, and still took a minute or more to lock you.
Which is part of what made them entirely overpowered. I'm not convinced damps needed their overall 'damp amount' reduced (like TDs) but I do think that 'you're damped, and even if you counter my damping by getting close, you're still screwed' was too much. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking? GMP and TNP |
General Coochie
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 18:16:00 -
[48]
Edited by: General Coochie on 11/12/2007 18:16:32
Originally by: ChimeraRouge
Originally by: General Coochie Instead of nerfing ECM, which is as powerful as I believe EWAR should be. Buff TDs and Damps.
no td and damp ships have many other ways to defend themselves.
A recon ships role isn't to defend itself, its to disrupt the enemy, something the ECM ships do well but the TD ships and damp ships doesn't do that well anymore. Sig removed, lacks Eve-related content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes |
Kadoes Khan
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 18:25:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 11/12/2007 16:30:37 Uhm wich recon has a tank? They all melt once under gunfire really, even to cruiser/bc dps. You know whats funny? Minmatar recons getting painters. Caldari should be getting painters because they are the missile race.
Why did you magically draw the connection between missiles and TP's when turrets also get a boost out of them? -=^=- "Someday the world will recognize the genius in my insanity." |
Danjira Ryuujin
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 19:03:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
I just wanted to boost TDs a bit :-( Why cant they jam explosion velocities and radius?
That would be reasonable if there was a counter module, scripted or not, that affects non-guided missiles as well. Rigs alone don't count.
Amarr - Annoying the Eve Community since 2005 |
|
eve warrior
Minmatar Filthy Scum
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 19:08:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Matrixcvd Edited by: Matrixcvd on 11/12/2007 12:50:40 Horse Poo Poo, ECM is the easiestly defeatable with 1 ECCM mid slot.
What a load of BS. I have been in loads of fights where i have had 1 if Not 2 ECCM mods and spent the whole fight jammed by one rook or faclon. With one fitted its a joke.
Eve warrior
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Uninvited Guests Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 19:33:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Kadoes Khan
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 11/12/2007 16:30:37 Uhm wich recon has a tank? They all melt once under gunfire really, even to cruiser/bc dps. You know whats funny? Minmatar recons getting painters. Caldari should be getting painters because they are the missile race.
Why did you magically draw the connection between missiles and TP's when turrets also get a boost out of them?
Because a missile boat that uses a web+tp against an enemy gets a larger hit/dps boost then a turret boat using web+tp. Or am I wrong? ---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Uninvited Guests Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 19:37:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Danjira Ryuujin
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
I just wanted to boost TDs a bit :-( Why cant they jam explosion velocities and radius?
That would be reasonable if there was a counter module, scripted or not, that affects non-guided missiles as well. Rigs alone don't count.
Sure lets make a new mid slot item that dampens explosion velociti/radius jamming. Important thing is it ONLY dampens a jam and does NOT add explo velo/rad when its not jammed. Just like ECCM, worthless when youre not jammed. Would you like that? Im in for it. Id actually use TDs and just laugh at missile users because no one would fit that module, just like no one really fits ECCM in a normal fit. ---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
shinsushi
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 19:42:00 -
[54]
Actually, Tracking disruptors really need a Fall-off script.
Right now there are rigs and ship bonuses that increase the fall-off of a ship, along with T2 ammo nearly doubling it. There is nothing you can do to take this away, and as such TDs aren't as viable vs non-laser ships. An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. |
velmistr Ecco
Caldari InNova Tech Inc Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 19:48:00 -
[55]
Originally by: eve warrior
Originally by: Matrixcvd Edited by: Matrixcvd on 11/12/2007 12:50:40 Horse Poo Poo, ECM is the easiestly defeatable with 1 ECCM mid slot.
What a load of BS. I have been in loads of fights where i have had 1 if Not 2 ECCM mods and spent the whole fight jammed by one rook or faclon. With one fitted its a joke.
Eve warrior
Rook with skilled pilot should be able to permajam one BS even with ECCM fitted (and running). Check your sensor strength, allow at least 4 racial ECM jammers for rook, do the math and you will see. One sensor dampening ship also is able to disable one other ship (even carrier). Rook will jam carrier only ocassionaly due to its big sensor strength.
|
MegabitOne
Caldari The Black Ops Black Core Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 19:57:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Ian Logalus Since last patch you need at least 4 damps or tracking disrupters on 1 target to render it useless compared to a ship which is jammed and with decent skills you don't need more then 2 jammers to jamm a target, maybe 3 if you are unlucky but I agree with the OP here. ECM is not balanced at all, most range and effectiveness on 1 type is phoo.
Errr, not entirely correct, Ian. You can jam ANY ship with only one jammer (even a racial one of the 'wrong' race). The chances however of getting a jam are largely dependent on the jammer strength of your jammer (module + ship boni + skills etc). That's why EW pilots 'cycle' their jammers... --- I'm not as bad-ass as some of my corp mates, but I'll pwn you anyway!
-= In God we trust, all the others pay cash =- |
Liang Nuren
The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 19:57:00 -
[57]
Disclaimer: I have not read most of this thread. Lyria Skydancer started it, and always gets flamed (sometimes for very good reasons). I'm not interested in reading the flames.
Now, from my perspective, ECM is exactly where it needs to be - even including ECM drones etc. Since ECM just got a boost, I think that CCP agrees with this statement.
It may be further noted that CCP may be intending to nerf variety in ewar (since it makes it singularly hard to balance). If there's only one kind of viable ewar, then people really can't say that ECCM is "useless". You either came prepared for ewar or you did not. I am not sure if this is what CCP is intending, but it's certainly the overall effect that I see from the Trinity patch.
Now, there are 3 sub-par forms of ewar (to ECM).
1. Target Painters. Overall, the effect of this is 'underwhelming' (simply stated). I'd like to see a focus on web range for the T1 ewar cruiser.
2. Tracking Disruptors. I have previously chosen to use this particular form of ewar, but the effect now (whether on a bonused ship or not) is extremely underwhelming. IMHO, the bes thing to do to ships that have a bonus for this is to give them an additional bonus to tracking disruptors.
I'd really like to see an optimal range bonus for tracking disruptors, but I think it might be bit overpowering. Instead, I'll 'settle' for suggesting an additional falloff range bonus to tracking disruptors.
This bonus would be to falloff range (of the module itself). This would have a couple of effects on combat: A. It would allow for 'chance based' (falloff) usage of tracking disruptors at (much?) higher ranges. B. It would mean that Amarr recons have a very very strong role in fleet combat. Yes, an Amarr recon would be able to completely (chance based) shut down 2-3 snipers in fleet combat. This is not a bad thing.
To the people who say that there should be explosion velocity/falloff scripts... I'm not so sure that you're right. The typical logic that falloff scripts should exist because Minmatar is Amarr's racial enemy... ok, but then you have to give up your optimal range script (so that the game makes sense in a roleplay perspective. )
3. Remote Sensor Damps. Remote sensor damps are very close to useless on recons after the nerf. I went out PVP'ing last night in my Arazu found that my role in a gang was horribly mangled (completely non-functional). It didn't tend to affect my solo work though.
My suggestion is simply to increase the bonuses to 10-12.5% on damp bonused ships.
I'd like to further suggest faction (Navy and Pirate) and T2 scripts be introduced quite soon.
-Liang
-- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU.
Yarr? |
Mr Ignitious
Gallente Kingpins
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 20:08:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Trojanman190
Originally by: Ruciza Edited by: Ruciza on 11/12/2007 15:45:56 A Lachesis can neutralize a Rook at all ranges in an EW duel against each other. A Rook with range rigs wins statistically above 200 km. The lower the distance, the more advantaged the Damp ship is. Without ECCM.
Thats not completely correct, at close range the rook definitely has the advantage because the lachesis might not be able to damp the rook down low enough, this making his entire ship useless.
ECM is broken because it offers effectiveness from 200km down to 0km. No other ewar can do that. Period. To top that off a single good jam can win a fight, there are tempests on MDK killboard STILL fitting a single multispec because a single close range jam can win a fight. You can TD for an entire fight and have it not get you anywhere. You can TP for an entire fight and have it not matter a bit. You can't damp at extremely long range and its useless, at least at breaking locks, at extreme close range.
Strength is not an issue, and no matter what they do to other ewar something needs to be done about ecm range. ECm strike me as a close range ewar, not a long range one.
Before nerfing anything... boost other stuff. Nerf's suck.
i find this untrue because on my lach i like to fit a combo between scan res damps and ECM so that my target takes for ever to lock me and gives me time to get another jam cycle in there...mind you i have an ECM rig and the ECM amp in the low, the rest i wont disclose, but i will insist that if the lach goes both the rook won't have much of a chance.
|
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N. Black-Out
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 20:22:00 -
[59]
people argue that it is chance based, hence not 100% accurate like td's or damps etc, but if you program something with 90% chance, its hardly ever ever going to not work..
even before the boost to falcons from 10% to 20%, I never fought a falcon that couldn't perma jam me. Nor during tests with corp mates did they ever fail to jam over a long period of time.
on the flip side, you need all 4 damps just to e-war one target. but with jammers you could potiantially disable 3-4 enemy ships. Same with t'ds you need at least 2-3 on a target.
its all well and good when they're on your side of course :)
Go Hard, or go Home.
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates Enuma Elish.
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 21:00:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Aaron Mirrorsaver people argue that it is chance based, hence not 100% accurate like td's or damps etc, but if you program something with 90% chance, its hardly ever ever going to not work..
even before the boost to falcons from 10% to 20%, I never fought a falcon that couldn't perma jam me. Nor during tests with corp mates did they ever fail to jam over a long period of time.
on the flip side, you need all 4 damps just to e-war one target. but with jammers you could potiantially disable 3-4 enemy ships. Same with t'ds you need at least 2-3 on a target.
its all well and good when they're on your side of course :)
Indeed.
90% odds _are_ good betting odds, which is why I fly a falcon. However I also have spare falcons (and rooks) for when that 10% comes up.
It does, all too often, and then you melt before you get a second chance.
*shrug*.
What the hell. Let's make SDAs (or equivalent) for damps too. Seems to me that that'd make the difference up somewhat. I mean, those lowslots on an arazu/lachesis are worthless, really aren't they? -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking? GMP and TNP |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |