EVE Search - Whats the think , with this Amarr Boost.

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Whats the think , with this Amarr Boost.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Bruce Deorum Minmatar Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.13 22:59:00 - [1] http://myeve.eve-online.com/feed/rdfdevblog.asp I know i know, But as a minmatar, i hate to see a whole blog like Amarr needs more cap Amarr needs more slots Amarr needs explosive damage (ffs) Amarr needs firepower And all we get is a tracking disruptor that affects our falloff & getting instead of 92.5 EMrez 90. This is big difference. (we already had a crappy range, forced to fight in falloff - less real DPS - no easy wayz to enhance falloff) and the only priviledge we had was that falloff was unaffacted by disruption (and that it is the same if u use 180mms, 220mm, or 425mm, guns). Anyway I think this is getting lame. Patch after patch, i havent seen anything good on our people. Need some morale boost, tell me why we're still better?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:01:00 - [2] Originally by: Bruce Deorum Need some morale boost, tell me why we're still better? We're not. Just get used to being screwed or train up Caldari/Amarr cruiser 5. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Bruce Deorum Minmatar Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:09:00 - [3] This article was outrageous. As if Amarr where the only race in the game that weren't perfect. As if i never wished this muninn i have, had more slots (which is the most handicaped ship for HAC as far as i can tell) Now that i mentioned muninn. It has exactly the same number of slots as the rupture. Rupture is almost 90% muninn (armor tankers ships... even have almost same armor rez) whereas vagabond is 2 times better than stabber. (more slots, more firepower, better rez)
Terianna Eri Amarr	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:14:00 - [4] Well, I fly Amarr and I've gotten pretty sick of hearing people say "Train Caldari / Minmatar / Gallente." So.... Train Amarr. (P.S. Amarr don't really have more cap stability than any other race even before we account for weapon use, and the blog didn't give us any explosive damage. That was just one of the examples of player suggestions.) __________________________________
Jonny MoJo Amarr	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:15:00 - [5] Amarr suck. They Have worst tracking for close range Worst range for long range (new apoc makes it 2nd best range though) Worst cap useage Worst fitting requirements worst slot layouts. Now you are complaining about tracking disrupters. Well, your turrets are immune to neut. Amarr turrets are finished with neut. So if you cannot neut a minmatar to stop firing, then you can at least tracking disrupt them. Refresh for next Real life CCP Sig(21 Total)
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:16:00 - [6] Originally by: Terianna Eri (P.S. Amarr don't really have more cap stability than any other race even before we account for weapon use, and the blog didn't give us any explosive damage. That was just one of the examples of player suggestions.) Only because no race with an appropriately sized active tank has cap stability... thus you are not "better" or "worse". -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Terianna Eri Amarr	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:18:00 - [7] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Terianna Eri (P.S. Amarr don't really have more cap stability than any other race even before we account for weapon use, and the blog didn't give us any explosive damage. That was just one of the examples of player suggestions.) Only because no race with an appropriately sized active tank has cap stability... thus you are not "better" or "worse". -Liang Stability was the wrong word. Take out the "st" and just leave it as "ability." I don't find that the Amarran ships I fly have any better capacitors than the other ships do, but at least everyone can fit an injector. __________________________________
Mavil	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:23:00 - [8] Hey look, everybody! Jonny Jojo got himself an alt! Thank you for returning, oh great one. The boards have been so dry lately. They needed you and your tears. And to be more on topic here; Amarr did need a boost for quite a few ships. I'm still not sure why they thought the -resist change was such a good idea though.
Felix Dzerzhinsky legion of qui Black Star Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:32:00 - [9] Originally by: Bruce Deorum http://myeve.eve-online.com/feed/rdfdevblog.asp I know i know, But as a minmatar, i hate to see a whole blog like Amarr needs more cap Amarr needs more slots Amarr needs explosive damage (ffs) Amarr needs firepower And all we get is a tracking disruptor that affects our falloff & getting instead of 92.5 EMrez 90. This is big difference. (we already had a crappy range, forced to fight in falloff - less real DPS - no easy wayz to enhance falloff) and the only priviledge we had was that falloff was unaffacted by disruption (and that it is the same if u use 180mms, 220mm, or 425mm, guns). Anyway I think this is getting lame. Patch after patch, i havent seen anything good on our people. Need some morale boost, tell me why we're still better? Firstly, there is a very interesting discussion on the TD changes in this Ships and Fittings forum - some people, Ruah Piskonit of PIE and Guomingdung of Goonswarm have made a very good case for why the changes are fair. I suggest you read it. I know I learned a fair bit. Secondly, Minmatar are the speed race and are supposed to have the worst DPS - even lower then Caldari. The RP reason is based on their primitive and technologically inferior wepon systems - the game balance is that Minmatar make fast ships but don't hit particularly hard. Amarr do pitifully low damage for the price they pay for using lasers. Slight changes to fitting, cap use and damage need to be made in order to keep them competative. They are the 'Gank and Tank' race and the blog is clear that they will be getting more gank. They will not be getting more mids and they will not be getting 'Blaze' crystals (explosive). In all honesty, I see the resistance changes as a major boost for Minmatar more then for Amarr. Minmatar have it good right now, and as an older player, you should remember the days when no one flew Minmatar because they frankly sucked. Minmatar will keep their speed, but their damage is going to take a hit. I see that as being fair.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:38:00 - [10] Originally by: Felix Dzerzhinsky Firstly, there is a very interesting discussion on the TD changes in this Ships and Fittings forum - some people, Ruah Piskonit of PIE and Guomingdung of Goonswarm have made a very good case for why the changes are fair. I suggest you read it. I know I learned a fair bit. No, they make a case why it's somehow acceptable (to them) that a single unbonused tracking disruptor should overcome 6 tracking computers and 5 tracking enhancers. The simple fact is that Minmatar have no counter to the new tracking disruptor. Quote: Minmatar will keep their speed, but their damage is going to take a hit. I see that as being fair. Zulupark has said he is taking the speed away. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Koryvarn Liberty Rogues	Posted - 2008.02.14 00:51:00 - [11] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Felix Dzerzhinsky Firstly, there is a very interesting discussion on the TD changes in this Ships and Fittings forum - some people, Ruah Piskonit of PIE and Guomingdung of Goonswarm have made a very good case for why the changes are fair. I suggest you read it. I know I learned a fair bit. No, they make a case why it's somehow acceptable (to them) that a single unbonused tracking disruptor should overcome 6 tracking computers and 5 tracking enhancers. The simple fact is that Minmatar have no counter to the new tracking disruptor. -Liang I think the tracking disrupter is a direct effect of nanoboats with falloff rigs. Sure you can zoom about at speeds where I'll never be able to hit you... but at least now, the nano ship wont be able to hit me either, if I have a tracking disrupter fitted. I don't think it's a particular unfair change. It's not gonna make everyone fit a TD anyway. It has a use now, which is always nice. As for the OP.... the Amarr are getting some sucky ships fixed. They still have a lot of sucky ships, but every little helps. What people should be doing is encouraging ccp to fix sucky ships, so they may look at other ships that aren't performing. And lets face it, if you could run out of capacitor simply by shooting your guns, you'd whine about capacitor too.
Jurgen Cartis Caldari Interstellar Corporation of Exploration	Posted - 2008.02.14 01:20:00 - [12] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Felix Dzerzhinsky Firstly, there is a very interesting discussion on the TD changes in this Ships and Fittings forum - some people, Ruah Piskonit of PIE and Guomingdung of Goonswarm have made a very good case for why the changes are fair. I suggest you read it. I know I learned a fair bit. No, they make a case why it's somehow acceptable (to them) that a single unbonused tracking disruptor should overcome 6 tracking computers and 5 tracking enhancers. The simple fact is that Minmatar have no counter to the new tracking disruptor. You know Liang, 5 TE IIs and 6 TC IIs would get you a 50% boost to optimal on say, lasers or railguns. A single max-skilled unbonused TD II will take 50% range away, down to 75% range. So tell me, do the Amarr have a counter to the old Tracking Disruptor? Do the Caldari? 3 Falloff rigs gets you about a 40% increase to falloff (so long as we're comparing setups using as many upgrades to range as possible, we may as well). You're not much worse off there. Would Falloff scripts/effects for TEs/TCs be unbalanced? I'm not sure. But tell me, why should autocannons be practically immune to the range destroying effects of the least-used (currently) EW mod in the game? Why should Autocannons turrets be practically immune to one of the primary effects of turret disruptors? -------------------- ICE Blueprint Sales FIRST!! -Yipsilanti Pfft. Never such a thing as a "last chance". ;) -Rauth
arbalesttom Caldari Glauxian Brothers	Posted - 2008.02.14 01:21:00 - [13] Edited by: arbalesttom on 14/02/2008 01:22:59 Edited by: arbalesttom on 14/02/2008 01:22:36 Originally by: Jonny MoJo Edited by: Jonny MoJo on 13/02/2008 23:16:01 Amarr suck. They Have worst tracking for close range Worst range for long range (new apoc makes it 2nd best range though) Worst cap useage Worst fitting requirements worst slot layouts. Even a Thorax fitted with lasers outclasses laser omen in every singe way - even more cap and cap recharge. Lolz. Laser thorax outclasses maller as well. lol Now you are complaining about tracking disrupters. Well, your turrets are immune to neut. Amarr turrets are finished with neut. So if you cannot neut a minmatar to stop firing, then you can at least tracking disrupt them. Omg jonny did they activate those lame sig of yours again? Anyway... IBTL Edit: Ps. Amarr is fine, the only 'problem' is you need overall more maxed skills before you can fly the ships 'good' (just like minmatar...). The devs think amarr is fine, so stop whining please.. *Warning! Sig ahead!* Bounty: Jonny JoJo
Perfect Diamond	Posted - 2008.02.14 01:27:00 - [14] Edited by: Perfect Diamond on 14/02/2008 01:29:19 Remember the em nerf hits amarr really hard to. The pilgrim goes from 60 to 50% em armor resists and gains 10% explosive shield resists. How many other amarr ships are affected by this? FOR CRYING OUT LOUD, I CAN'T EVEN THINK OF A SINGLE AMARR SHIP THAT SHIELD TANKS. GET OVER IT.
goodby4u Logistic Technologies Incorporated	Posted - 2008.02.14 01:29:00 - [15] Originally by: Bruce Deorum http://myeve.eve-online.com/feed/rdfdevblog.asp I know i know, But as a minmatar, i hate to see a whole blog like Amarr needs more cap Amarr needs more slots Amarr needs explosive damage (ffs) Amarr needs firepower And all we get is a tracking disruptor that affects our falloff & getting instead of 92.5 EMrez 90. This is big difference. (we already had a crappy range, forced to fight in falloff - less real DPS - no easy wayz to enhance falloff) and the only priviledge we had was that falloff was unaffacted by disruption (and that it is the same if u use 180mms, 220mm, or 425mm, guns). Anyway I think this is getting lame. Patch after patch, i havent seen anything good on our people. Need some morale boost, tell me why we're still better? As I and many other people have said the zealot/omen/apoc needed boosts because there was close to no use for them(zealot to a lesser degree,but it still needed oomph),I think these boosts are a great idea and are necessary. The disruption thing is because ccp is getting tired of every roaming gang being a nano one,and most of the ships in that gang are minmatar(vaga huggin rapier sleipnir),ships like the ishtar you can kill the drones of so thats not as big of a problem. Whether I like these changes or not they are coming,nanoing is being overused and if it remains so im sure ccp will nerf it as they have done to overused stuff in that past. This is what happens when a kestrel with thermal missiles declares war on earth
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.14 01:36:00 - [16] Originally by: Jurgen Cartis You know Liang, 5 TE IIs and 6 TC IIs would get you a 50% boost to optimal on say, lasers or railguns. A single max-skilled unbonused TD II will take 50% range away, down to 75% range. So tell me, do the Amarr have a counter to the old Tracking Disruptor? Do the Caldari? Yes - because you can affect your range modifier - both by ammo and by module. Autocannons cannot affect their range modifier beyond that of Barrage (which is being rendered useless) - even including modules. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Bruce Deorum Minmatar Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.14 02:11:00 - [17] I can understand that some are less usable than others. But this is a fact for other races also (see muninn) Only amarr have useless ships? Previous Patch were the Khanid Ships (amarr again if my memory serves me right) About a year ago was the big nanofiber nerf. (i understand this was quite fair, but hey didnt it fix things or what?) But by with the HUGE tracking disrupt boost, practically this is the end of skirmish warfare. We must know face each other, open fire, and wait. This is not a slight DPS reduction for minmatar, this is a ZEROing of damage. Because I cannt fly closer than 15km (even that is too close imho). As per TD boost, i will be able to deal some damage at 8-9km. U see if any fast ship, (for which i sacrifice all my 4 low slots to achieve that speed) gets to close (16km is the RED ALERT for me) gets webbed, and boom. PS I need some explanation. Above post smbd said that the resistances change are actually a big minmatar boost. Why is it so?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.14 02:13:00 - [18] Originally by: Bruce Deorum PS I need some explanation. Above post smbd said that the resistances change are actually a big minmatar boost. Why is it so? The argument is that EMP will not suck as much as it used to (EM and Exp damage) -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.02.14 03:41:00 - [19] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Jurgen Cartis You know Liang, 5 TE IIs and 6 TC IIs would get you a 50% boost to optimal on say, lasers or railguns. A single max-skilled unbonused TD II will take 50% range away, down to 75% range. So tell me, do the Amarr have a counter to the old Tracking Disruptor? Do the Caldari? Yes - because you can affect your range modifier - both by ammo and by module. Autocannons cannot affect their range modifier beyond that of Barrage (which is being rendered useless) - even including modules. -Liang Yes they can. Falloff rigs. Fit them. Also, the TD boost is a minmitar boost.
Gneeznow Minmatar North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.02.14 03:48:00 - [20] /me trains amarr
goodby4u Logistic Technologies Incorporated	Posted - 2008.02.14 03:48:00 - [21] Originally by: Bruce Deorum Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 14/02/2008 02:24:28 I can understand that some ships are less usable than others. But this is a fact for other races also (see muninn) Only amarr have useless ships? Previous Patch were the Khanid Ships (amarr again if my memory serves me right) About a year ago was the big nanofiber nerf. (i understand this was quite fair, but hey didnt it fix things or what?) But by with the HUGE tracking disrupt boost, practically this is the end of skirmish warfare. We must know face each other, open fire, and wait. This is not a slight DPS reduction for minmatar, this is a ZEROing of damage. Because I cannt fly closer than 15km (even that is too close imho). As per TD boost, i will be able to deal some damage at 8-9km. U see if any fast ship, (for which i sacrifice all my 4 low slots to achieve that speed) gets to close (16km is the RED ALERT for me) gets webbed, and boom. PS I need some explanation. Above post smbd said that the resistances change are actually a big minmatar boost. Why is it so? Yes,all races have their useless ships(though not useless,but in most situations they wont fit)however,amarr have the most of any race. As for the falloff thing TD's affect any turret ship,med sized amarrian weapons(shortrange)can go to about 20-30km,since a TD with a range script cuts that nearly in half. As for it boosting minmatar,barrage and hail will work alot better against shields now aswell as emp towards armor,whereas amarr have em/therm so it only affects one,not to mention it doesnt affect the fight with amarr vs minmatar t2 as most minmatar t2 shield buffer and the emp for the shields werent changed. This is what happens when a kestrel with thermal missiles declares war on earth
Msobe	Posted - 2008.02.14 05:46:00 - [22] They made it really simple in the post. "The reason for this change is the Tracking Disruptors are largely ineffective against blasters and auto cannons which have a high tracking speeds and large falloffs. Disrupting the optimal range does not affect them in any significant way and tracking disruption is not very effective either because of the large falloff. By allowing the Optimal Range Disruption script to affect falloff as well, Tracking Disruptors can be used effectively to reduce the range of blasters and auto cannons." That's why they changed TD's . . . they weren't happy with the fact that they impacted lasers more than other turret types. It's not a minmatar nerf, its a buff to an ewar system that was largely useless, and certainly less useful than the rest. Note that they will be more often be useful to minmatar pilots - who have more mid slots, and so more often will find a way to fit one than amarr, anyhow. Trying to fit crucial mods into fewer slots than you have mods as it is . . . I just can't see that hordes of amarr pilots will be running around with TD's on unbonused ships, regardless. (MWD, Web, Scram, Cap injector . . . oh wait, I only have 3 mids.) I am simply amazed that people can honestly complain that "gee, that will reduce my damage to zero at range" when it was already doing that to amarr. Lasers are different from projectiles, and can fit longer range crystals . . . but minmatar ships are different than amarr ships, can can dictate range. Having your turrets shut down is no more or less fair because you're using one weapon system or another. As for them having no counter . . . I keep hearing from minmatar shout over and over "But every ewar mod has a counter, its not fair we have no counter module for fall off reduction!" Funny, last I checked, there is no mod to reduce sig, so the matari racial ewar has no counter. :-/ Should fall off be increased by tc/te? Possibly - I think probably. I think it was an oversight that TD's were only debuffing optimal range, when a turrets range depends on both optimal and falloff. If that's the case, it's the same oversight that has TC/TE buffing only optimal instead of optimal and falloff. In any kind of MMO, making a change is never as simple as "just add this, it makes sense" though. It should be tried out and tested, and if its viable, then implemented. So yeah . . . is it unfair to buff TDs? No, not at all. Is it particularly an amarr buff? In name only - very few unbonused amarr ships can fit them anyhow. It does make the game better by adding in new strategic possibilities, and that can't be a bad thing.
HarderThisTime	Posted - 2008.02.14 07:02:00 - [23] They are sticking to this whole "gank and tank" theory and they are failing to acknowledge that amarr FAIL at this. Amarr cannot tank and shoot guns at the same time. They run out of cap. FAIL Most amarr ships cannot tackle or be used for "assault" purposes because of limited mid slots. They are going to make a special exception for the omen, but not the rest of the ships. Not even the laser interceptor can tackle. FAIL Laser damage type is NOT BALANCED. Most ships in eve having EM resistance as highest resist, in combination with a damage system that is almost entirely EM with most ammo is NOT balance. FAIL What still needs to happen: 1) Leverage the midslots for ALL Amarr ships. 2) Flip thermal and EM damage. 3) Lasers/crystals/ships need to be tweeked to where amarr can fire lasers and sustain a tank. Some say this would be overpowered. No, this would be GALLENTE
Dristra Amarr Shadows of the Dead The Dawn of Darkness	Posted - 2008.02.14 11:15:00 - [24] Hey, emp ammo is getting buffed, so minis are getting a buff.... Support the introduction of well thought out Amarr solutions! I believe rats should avoid you if you have high standing with them.
Diomidis Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.14 13:16:00 - [25] Ppl, get real! And that goes to my corp-m8 who started another lame flaming OP! TDs needed the boost - that fact is that Minmatar was immune to TD range disruption more than any other race. Blasters are not similar to ACs. Blasters where and will be point-blank weapons. Ewar is meant to over-power modules. Just like ECCM cannot nullify the ECM effects, or no-nano ship can beat a bonused web - yet 2. In comparison even fall-off rigs seam a fair trade against TDs that just disrupt range. Also, EM armor rez decrease is an overall boost to EM dmg. So EVERY race that can deal EM dmg is booster more or less. And Minmatar are more likely to pack EM capable ammo than any other race, as EMP are pretty much standard for "cheap" ammo. And faction EMP is pretty much standard for close range minmatar fits => a great boost for these also. How Ravens and other EM capable offensive fits can take advantage of EM rez changes is up to your imagination... Also 92.5% resistances without expensive mods was "too much", don't you think? If other races can't do that, y should minmatar? (for their given "strong" T2 res).
Raxxius Maelstrom	Posted - 2008.02.14 13:46:00 - [26] Originally by: Msobe That's why they changed TD's . . . they weren't happy with the fact that they impacted lasers more than other turret types. It's not a minmatar nerf, its a buff to an ewar system that was largely useless, and certainly less useful than the rest. Note that they will be more often be useful to minmatar pilots - who have more mid slots, and so more often will find a way to fit one than amarr, anyhow. Trying to fit crucial mods into fewer slots than you have mods as it is . . . I just can't see that hordes of amarr pilots will be running around with TD's on unbonused ships, regardless. (MWD, Web, Scram, Cap injector . . . oh wait, I only have 3 mids.) As for them having no counter . . . I keep hearing from minmatar shout over and over "But every ewar mod has a counter, its not fair we have no counter module for fall off reduction!" Funny, last I checked, there is no mod to reduce sig, so the matari racial ewar has no counter. :-/ I'm sorry, but I can't believe you're actually using target painters as a counterpoint. Target painters are highly situational and 95% of the time useless as sig radius is not really that important.
Bruce Deorum Minmatar Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.14 13:54:00 - [27] Im sorry but i dont think that any quite old player uses EMP as standar ammo. Barrage is the ammo 90% of the time, in pvp speaking of course. We will only switch to EMP (or hail) if we are need more DPS, we're sure we wont be webbed (cause EMP gives a practical shot range of 7-8km at max) and only for a short time if we cant get the target's shields down...
Twin blade Minmatar The Triangle Exa Nation	Posted - 2008.02.14 15:41:00 - [28] Originally by: Felix Dzerzhinsky Originally by: Bruce Deorum http://myeve.eve-online.com/feed/rdfdevblog.asp Secondly, Minmatar are the speed race and are supposed to have the worst DPS - even lower then Caldari. The RP reason is based on their primitive and technologically inferior wepon systems - the game balance is that Minmatar make fast ships but don't hit particularly hard. Yer like RP means any thing with the cyclone and maelstorm been shield tanks Been HIGH tec unless building them is easyer than wacking a armor plate out now. The whole Dps for speed is not blanced for the most part a Massive 10-15 base speed is hardly balanced given the Lower tank cap/rechange and loss of dps on none dual dd bonus ships. Death is great rember where all dying to get there.
Takeshi Yamato	Posted - 2008.02.14 16:09:00 - [29] Quote: I can understand that some ships are less usable than others. But this is a fact for other races also (see muninn) Only amarr have useless ships? The Muninn is an awesome ship for speedy gangs and midrange sniping. Maybe you would prefer it to be a different ship, suited for something else but it does its job very well. No, of course it's not only amarr that has useless ships, but they have the biggest amount of useless/underpowered ships.
Diomidis Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.14 16:15:00 - [30] Originally by: Bruce Deorum Im sorry but i dont think that any quite old player uses EMP as standar ammo. Barrage is the ammo 90% of the time, in pvp speaking of course. We will only switch to EMP (or hail) if we are need more DPS, we're sure we wont be webbed (cause EMP gives a practical shot range of 7-8km at max) and only for a short time if we cant get the target's shields down... Barrage vs. TD's fall-off disruption etc is all whining about the Vaga getting less effective. But I assure you that many non-Vaga minmatar ships fly around with EMP ammo (at-least in bay) and in general EMP ammo is way more "standard fit" than TDs are or ever will be. Simply because webbers and cap boosters take up mid-slots - and the ships that can effectively fit all-three are very limited, and surely not all Amarrian - just like the barrage-limited ships are way fewer than you suggest them to be. And simply because Range-wise, EMP is a close match to other T1 projectile ammo it's a practical and prefered choise by many - at least faction EMP. Now EMP won't be limited for the few, purely tanked Shield tanks - rare in PvP environment = practicaly an minmatar boost. -------------------------------------------------- Don't bother whining about the Vaga, the Curse, or other specialized T2 ships in terms of RP and technology advantages - plz. --------------------------------------------------

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.