| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 72 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 22 post(s) |
Aceju
The House Of Cards. Holdings
The House Of Cards.
0
   |
Posted - 2012.03.23 20:29:00 -
[1861] - Quote
 Yes .......What are you doing ccp? Didn't we go through this last year with that great big apology from the president of your company for not listening to the subscribers? The apology stated that he would LISTEN to what the consumer (us) had to say. If you read this topic.....NO ONE WANTS IT!.....What more do you need to know? Is CCP reniging on their promise that was made by their CEO last year? We do not want this change....Clear enough? |
Mroova Hellbound
Bane Heavy Industries
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 21:26:00 -
[1862] - Quote
To tell the truth, I'm too lazy to read over 90 pages of this thread to see if that what I want to say is here already, but seeing the last few posts I recon it wasn;t suggested.
I somewhat support the new ship tree but I cannot see the reason to destroy the current battlecruisers and destroyer non racial status. Why not leave it non-racial, so the tree for let's say Ammar would be:
Ammar Frigate -> Destroyer -> Ammar cruiser -> Battlecruiser -> Ammar Battleship -> and so on...
so to fly an Ammar Battleship you woul have to have skills:
Primary:
Battlecruisers Lv4
--primary:
--ANY cruiser skill Lv4
Secondary:
Ammar cruiser Lv4
--primary:
--Destroyers Lv4
--secondary:
--Ammar frigate Lv4
Honestly, the policy "if you can fly it you still will be" is still not fair if the skill is divided by 4. Let's take battlecruiser skill: it takes about 1.2 mil SPs to take this skill from level 4 to level 5
I just can't imagine that peaple who have BCR on 4-th lvl will have 4.8 mil SPs less that people who had it on lvl 5.
Hope CCP You will not do it so anyone will be left further bhind than other (and on this example only on 1 lvl of BCR skill it woud be nearly 5 mil SP!!) |
Sarah Schneider
PonyWaffe
Test Alliance Please Ignore
47
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 23:11:00 -
[1863] - Quote
Aceju wrote: Yes .......What are you doing ccp? Didn't we go through this last year with that great big apology from the president of your company for not listening to the subscribers? The apology stated that he would LISTEN to what the consumer (us) had to say. If you read this topic.....NO ONE WANTS IT!.....What more do you need to know? Is CCP reniging on their promise that was made by their CEO last year? We do not want this change....Clear enough?
You, sir. Does not, represent, the Eve Community, therefore, you does not represent the 'consumer' as a whole.
I (and afaik many people i know, if not most of them infact) support these changes for the sole reason that it will streamline the shipline and skill progression and hopefully will help ccp to fix the current ship line and further improvements which is logical if some of haters here care enough to read the devblogs and posts and watch the fanfest stream. |
Karsa Egivand
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 23:43:00 -
[1864] - Quote
Ok, now rumours/information are filtering in from fanfest:
 The timing of the default destroyer/BC skill -> racial dessie/BC skill change might not be Inferno 1.0, but rather later patches/expansions... more like late in 2012, rather than May 22nd ... with Inferno itself tackling frigate balancing first.
Now, the timing of this change is crucial for a lot of players that are in a hurry/panic trying to get to BC V with all racial cruiser skills at level III. I know people skilling this now on an Int/Mem remap or are (considering) using one of their bonus remaps to getting it NOW.
People might get annoyed if that change then comes months later - (they might get annoyed either way, if its coming early and they didn't get it in time, etc.). Basically, people are hunting free skill points with determination, we are eve players after all. 
You might confirm/refute those rumours or release some information on the timing of this change soon, as it significantly impacts people's skill queue planning already. 
May or late 2012 is a big difference after all. Some rough timing (Inferno 1.0, soon after, months after) would be much appreciated. |
Rimase
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 00:18:00 -
[1865] - Quote
(SUGGESTION)
Medical Clone policy met - Civil Service
Quote:Security Status: 0.0+
Empire Standing: 5.0+
Civil Service policy condition met: YES
Your Medical Clone policy includes a Civil Service condition which has been met. Your aggressor remains in your solarsystem and your Medical Clone has become potentially compromised, and so you are provided with a well-equipped unique protective ship in promoting you a successful departure from these premises.
Note: This ship and its modules is imperial/state/federal/civil property and must not be resold. (Can Contract but cannot sell on Market!)
Capsuleers are highly valued for their perseverance and successes on the universe and for our Empire, and we wish you a safe continuation.
This addresses an obstacle that can happen. With the recent proposed speculated changes of this blog, I suspect some T1 ships may be removed, which is fine by me. If any ship may be proposed to be undeniably obsolete, make use of it instead!: Protecting Vulnerable Medical Clones.
(SUGGESTION)
Medical Clone policy met - Militia Service
Quote:Registered Militia policy condition met: YES
Your Medical Clone policy includes a Militia Service condition which has been met. You were destroyed with an enemy Militia contributing to your failure. As a registered Militant Capsuleer influencing your empire's/state's/federation's/republic's/other's military efforts you are replenished with a branded economic variation of the shipline you were commanding. You have been replenished with a {ship name-link}.
Note: This ship and its modules is imperial/state/federal/republic/other property and cannot be resold. (Cannot Contract and cannot sell on Market!)
Capsuleers are highly valued for their powerful complementaries to our military. We expect you learn from your mistakes and continue successfully.
This correlates with DUST endless supply of 'standard' equipment upon respawning in-game. Faction Warfare is really slow-paced. LET'S SPEED DIS **** UP! Both DUST and EVE would have same game-rules in common working alike when respawning. With the recent proposed speculated changes of this blog, I suspect some T1 ships may be removed, which is fine by me. If any ship may be proposed to be undeniably obsolete, make use of it instead!: Promoting Faction Warfare.
Summery: EVE is a ragefest. Ease the impacting pain of 'pod-killed!' by cushioning the blow. Where some T1 ships in this blog may become put to one side--WAIT! We have uses for them! (Civil Service & Militia Service within Medical Clone policy). |
Rimase
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 01:05:00 -
[1866] - Quote
With EVE Fanfest's notion on keeping ship balance in-check - THAT'S GREAT!  However, here's a contributory perspective on the idea of Capital ships amongst their sub-ordinate scale of ships.
(SUGGESTION)
- Small, Medium and Large ships;
- and Capital ships.
Small, Medium and Large ships can be expected to play their roles and balance into each other perfectly like a jigsaw. Their roles inherently would create tactical chaos in fleet battles and co-ordination.
Capitals ships could specifically be for fleeting corporations only. Their role would be to stabilize the chaos of fleet battles and co-ordinations.
[IMAGE]
If you read just above this, you should be vaguely imagining their renewed role.
Ok. To continue... Quite simply we'd expect Small, Medium and Large to do most of the work whereas Capitals see the chaos of their sub-ordinates through their tasks. This quite possibly would bring a nice refreshed appreciation for Capital Dreadnoughts, Titans and Carriers, and even a Freighter somehow-maybe. They would regulate a fleet's performance, they secure a solarsystem (with S,M,L), they intimidate the enemy, they additionally protect starbases. Mostly 'aggressive' logistical roles whereas sub-ordinate logistics would be 'defensive'. |
Lady Adalise
The Sponge Bob Square Pants
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 01:34:00 -
[1867] - Quote
I was only able to read through 3 pages of Whaaa my SP's before I had to stop. How many times does someone have to tell you the pen is blue before you believe them even as you watch them write in blue with it?
My question is how is removing tier's going to affect manufacturing and the indy aspect of things. Does that now mean all my t2 Production is gonna go down the toilet?
and beware pigeonholing though roles sound great the first thing i thought of was any other MMO and how the talent/skill tree's didn't change the fact that everyone even though wearing different clothing where all pretty much the same Char running around in different colors.(and we don't even get different colors on ships so it would be a bunch of ship clones all over eve.) |
Karsa Egivand
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2012.03.25 00:11:00 -
[1868] - Quote
So, any more on the timing of the BC/dessie-skill change? |
Ceptia Cyna
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.03.25 00:33:00 -
[1869] - Quote
Rumors say 24. April is the first patch.
So if you want to get some cookies (free SP) you maybe should start training BC V / Dest V now.
No idea if you need Cruisers IV aswell but seems everybody whos late will miss out big time on the free SP hahahaha :D |
Karsa Egivand
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2012.03.25 04:10:00 -
[1870] - Quote
CCP says 24th april is the precursor-patch, and 22nd may is Inferno 1.0 - not rumour.
The question is when this particular change is going to be included. |
|
|
Adolf Hilmar
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
85
|
Posted - 2012.03.25 06:13:00 -
[1871] - Quote
Agreed. Please clarify if the racial battlecruiser and destroyer skill change will happen in the Apr 24 presursor patch or the May 22 release. |
Ceptia Cyna
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.03.25 12:58:00 -
[1872] - Quote
I doubt they will ever clarify the exact date of the change as everybody and their grandparents would jump the free SP train then.
Maybe you know some CSM Member which will accidently skill the right skills in the right time on some alt char...  |
Naara Elein
Les Force
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.25 16:11:00 -
[1873] - Quote
Skill tree change:
I want to see a proper suggestion for how this will be handled before I can comment on it. It is nice that you let us know something like this early on, but just reading in this thread shows that it has created a small panic. Information like this should have been backed up with a fleshed out suggestion of how it might be handled.
Free sp's for only some players is just as bad as having others loose their ability to pilot some of their ships. But if one of those routes is required, i think the latter is the best from a game perspective, even though it will hurt me. The battlecruiser skill currently unlocks 15 T1 ships and 8 T2 ships, and that is actually a bit too much.
Ship overhaul:
Giving the ships an overhaul is a great idea. Too many worthless ships as it is now.
The idea of introducing ship lines sounded good at first, but I am not so sure anymore. Pushing the tech 1 ships towards a role specialization infringes on what the tech 2 ships are supposed to be about. Blurring the lines between those two might not be a good idea. Also the ship line called "bombardment" sounded very strange, how can you "pin" someone in space with artillery fire when there is no cover to hide behind? If bombardment is going to be just long range damage, their role will compete with the "combat" sniper ships, and with delayed damage and weaker tank i have serious doubts about their attractiveness.
A loose idea here, just to be constructive. I would much rather see something that embraces customizeability. Just like T2 ships gets a pile of free resistance excluded from stacking penalty, maybe T1 ships could get built in modules free from stacking penalty. Nothing extreme, but examples could be: a larger capactior, more hitpoint buffer, more agility, faster target locking. Something that represents a strength of that race and that sets the ship apart from the others. This kind of stuff nudges a ship gently towards a role, but don't exclude the ship from doing other things. An amarr ship with an oversized capactior could use that for better active tanking, keep an MWD active for longer, fitting smartbombs or just about anything that needs a lot of cap. The possibilities are more interesting and much more suited for customization than arbitrarily forcing a ship into a "combat" role with forced limitations.
As for the amarr frigate overhaul. Consider having one anti-frigate frigate, and one big-game-hunter frigate. It is a quite a lot like "combat" and "assault" roles, but I think that frigates really need that diversity instead of having just "crap" and "good" to choose from.
|
Akturous
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
29
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 02:13:00 -
[1874] - Quote
One of the principal problems with this game and new players (which are always needed) is the absolutely enormous length of time it takes to get proficient with a certain ship in sp terms, or fly and use modules.
It becomes quite depressing for a new player seeing that it'll take him a YEAR!! of subscription to a video game to be able to use a battleship proffiently for instance (t2 guns, bs V, support skills). It really drives players away when they see all the things they won't be able to do until kingdom come ffs.
The battle cruiser skill was one of the saving graces for new players, because even if you changed your mind about your racial preferences (I for instance started in drones and Gallente, then moved to Minmi), that was one skill that was always useful and you wouldn't have to do more than a couple of days training to cross train to another races bc hull and bcs are always useful.
With these changes all your going to do is widen the gap between new players and old players (who like me will get all the bcs bumped to V). It's a very bad idea. I see no reason why it even needs to be done? What's wrong with having access to all bc hulls to V with one skill at V and a few at 4 and 3? There's no reason to make all the skills need to go to IV just for the sake of consistancy, if it works why change it?
The things I do like are getting rid of the requirement to train hacs to get a command ship, though I don't like the idea of removing racial cruiser V for the same. Command ships are damn fantastic and should be difficult to get into.
Removing the tier system for bcs is a good idea.
Removing BS V for caps is a bad idea and your effectively going to have to reimburse everyone with bs V who flys caps, because otherwise it's waisted sp (and dollars more to the point).
There is effectively no way you can do many of these pointless changes without pissing off a lot of people and making life even more difficult for your new players. Do you ask new players (by new I mean a few months old, not 10days) what they think? |
Adolf Hilmar
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
85
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 05:01:00 -
[1875] - Quote
I'm a new player (several months old). I think you don't need BC 5 to fly a decent battlecruiser. When you're several months old, most of your training goes in to fitting, tanking, and weapon skills. Training BC 4 is pretty quick in comparison. I don't think racial battlecruiser skills will change this. |
Flux Saissore
EVE University
Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 17:00:00 -
[1876] - Quote
I believe that the ability to fly a ship should never be removed from a player. That makes sense to me. But I also feel that free skill points should not be handed out to veterans driving a massive wedge between new players and the elite. There are ways to achieve both, but CCP is ignoring the latter and planning on a massive bailout of the experienced players.
I think the proposed skill reimbursement plan is ill conceived and needs to be rethought. Don't hand out free skill points to the players who need them the least. It's daunting enough to get new players to try this game.
In summary:
1) If you can fly it today you can fly it tomorrow
2) You must earn your skill points like everyone else.
I'm happy with any solution that meets BOTH criteria. |
Hennrik
J-CORP
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 17:29:00 -
[1877] - Quote
What happenes to the people that trained Battlecruisers to V and all
racial cruisers to IV or V but NO specialisations such as Logistics IV
or Heavy Assault Ships IV? Will they still receive all racial BC at V? |
PinkKnife
PonyWaffe
Test Alliance Please Ignore
84
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 17:57:00 -
[1878] - Quote
Quote:Q: can we opt out for skills we don't want during the reimbursement process?
A: well, again, it depends on how it is done. We may just bluntly give all four variants at V if you had battlecruiser V for example, or maybe require that you also add the relevant Cruiser skill trained at level 3 to be eligible. On the latter case, just don't train the cruiser 3 skill, and you should not receive the new racial battlecruiser at 5. Not sure why one would do that however, it's like skipping free candy or cake while visiting your grandma.
Example:
If we go for option 1: you will get Amarr, Caldari, Gallente and Minmatar Battlecruiser skills at 5 if you previously had the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5.
If we go for option 2: you will get Amarr Battlecruiser skill at 5 only if you previously fulfilled all conditions to fly Amarr Battlecruisers, which means having the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5, PLUS the Amarr Cruiser at 3.
To remind it again, there are other options to consider, but no matter which one which choose, you won't lose anything out of the skill reimbursement plan.
I DO! For one, I don't want or plan to train min/caldari, getting a random minmatar battlecruiser V skill does nothing to help me, and just screws over my skill tree. Some of us take pride in the skills we have in terms of Min/Maxing and it is annoying to have one random ass skill just pointing out there being unused and pointless. I do not have min frig or min cruiser or min destroyer, it makes no sense to give me min battlecruiser.
If nothing else, please just give me the option to reject the skills if I want to. |
Kyr Evotorin
Psycho Tech Industries
Interstellar Hobos
4
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 19:18:00 -
[1879] - Quote
Is there a counter for how many people like and dislike this change... because I'd rather look at that than read over everyone's bickering about what should really be done and why.... considering most of the people with something to say,.. say nothing useful at all. |
Kush Monster
Big Tobacco
29
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 21:03:00 -
[1880] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:Quote:Q: can we opt out for skills we don't want during the reimbursement process?
A: well, again, it depends on how it is done. We may just bluntly give all four variants at V if you had battlecruiser V for example, or maybe require that you also add the relevant Cruiser skill trained at level 3 to be eligible. On the latter case, just don't train the cruiser 3 skill, and you should not receive the new racial battlecruiser at 5. Not sure why one would do that however, it's like skipping free candy or cake while visiting your grandma.
Example:
If we go for option 1: you will get Amarr, Caldari, Gallente and Minmatar Battlecruiser skills at 5 if you previously had the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5.
If we go for option 2: you will get Amarr Battlecruiser skill at 5 only if you previously fulfilled all conditions to fly Amarr Battlecruisers, which means having the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5, PLUS the Amarr Cruiser at 3.
To remind it again, there are other options to consider, but no matter which one which choose, you won't lose anything out of the skill reimbursement plan. I DO! For one, I don't want or plan to train min/caldari, getting a random minmatar battlecruiser V skill does nothing to help me, and just screws over my skill tree. Some of us take pride in the skills we have in terms of Min/Maxing and it is annoying to have one random ass skill just pointing out there being unused and pointless. I do not have min frig or min cruiser or min destroyer, it makes no sense to give me min battlecruiser. If nothing else, please just give me the option to reject the skills if I want to.
How do I thumbs down your post? since I can't I'll just write this up.
In your charactor sheet, go to the settings tab and click "show skills I currently have" there you go. no more racial skills showing up.
How to make mining enjoyable: An Autocannon, Faction Ammo, Your Mouth
|
|
|
Sephiroth CloneIIV
Vitriol Ventures
BLACK-MARK
68
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 22:36:00 -
[1881] - Quote
I think people don't understand what specialization means with this re-balancing, it means that ships in the same class specialize for different roles. And the major difference is not just scaling with higher tiers getting 'more stuff'.
Current system of tiers, ships get better and better higher on tiers, with increases to HP and slots without penalty for bigger size, so next to no reason to use lolships on lower tiers.
What CCP and others are suggesting with teircide is that tier is not what determines what is the best ship in any class but preference for roles (bonuses). The top teir being 'the best' is a general rule of thumb that unless the top tier for one race in a class that one horribly underpowered, in which case.... yea stuff needs to be rebalanced.
Example, ferox is a joke compared with the drake, but if it were to have the same number of turret slots to drakes missile slots, medium slots, and low slots, along with base HP, and mineral cost. It would be considered a viable alternative for pvp or missions.
Ships will specialize as they do currently, but no specialization will exist for the better or best ship, (teir 2 or 3). It will not overshadow tech 2's because those are specialization and bonuses to the max (4 bonuses compared with 2, ability to accomplish feats no tech 1 ship can do).
For ship choice and balance the systems give, I will summarize
OLD: teirs, ships are differentiated in same race and class by increasing amounts of better stuff; no real choice just use top teir that you can fit the most **** on.
NEW: specalization, ships have different bonuses and slots, different neither absolutely 'better'; actual choice for picking ship other then whatever is top tier. |
Sephiroth CloneIIV
Vitriol Ventures
BLACK-MARK
68
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 22:43:00 -
[1882] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:Quote:Q: can we opt out for skills we don't want during the reimbursement process?
A: well, again, it depends on how it is done. We may just bluntly give all four variants at V if you had battlecruiser V for example, or maybe require that you also add the relevant Cruiser skill trained at level 3 to be eligible. On the latter case, just don't train the cruiser 3 skill, and you should not receive the new racial battlecruiser at 5. Not sure why one would do that however, it's like skipping free candy or cake while visiting your grandma.
Example:
If we go for option 1: you will get Amarr, Caldari, Gallente and Minmatar Battlecruiser skills at 5 if you previously had the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5.
If we go for option 2: you will get Amarr Battlecruiser skill at 5 only if you previously fulfilled all conditions to fly Amarr Battlecruisers, which means having the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5, PLUS the Amarr Cruiser at 3.
To remind it again, there are other options to consider, but no matter which one which choose, you won't lose anything out of the skill reimbursement plan. I DO! For one, I don't want or plan to train min/caldari, getting a random minmatar battlecruiser V skill does nothing to help me, and just screws over my skill tree. Some of us take pride in the skills we have in terms of Min/Maxing and it is annoying to have one random ass skill just pointing out there being unused and pointless. I do not have min frig or min cruiser or min destroyer, it makes no sense to give me min battlecruiser. If nothing else, please just give me the option to reject the skills if I want to.
What about people who trained BC just so they could get access to all racial BC's. Not everyone is you, better to have everyone have access to everything they used too then many not because one person is anal about skills.
|
Caldain Morrow
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:14:00 -
[1883] - Quote
I believe that I posted some pages back with the idea that SP and skill books are refunded/given according to what races of a given skill can be flown. IE if you can fly drakes and caines but not harbies or myrms then you only get caldari and mini BC books and the SP to bring them up to whatever level they were before.
just a thought. make for more hamsters dying of hypertension at CCP but it would be the fairest way to do it IMO |
YuuKnow
157
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:14:00 -
[1884] - Quote
The fanfest presentation still did not address what role that capital ships will play in the new ship rebalancing.
Also there are still balant inconsistency to what CCP is saying it wants ships roles to look like and the actual stats that they are giving the ships. The "support ships" are supposedly weak, but then they give logistic uber resist. At the same time, they give other "support ships" like EW, flimsy EHP and resist and turn them into pure cannon fodder.
Before CCP does anything it needs to do two things:
1. Clearly define where capitals play in the ship rebalancing
2. Clearly define what other changes outside of skill point and traning prerequisits that they are proposing.
yk |
Caldain Morrow
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:16:00 -
[1885] - Quote
YuuKnow wrote:The fanfest presentation still did not address what role that capital ships will play in the new ship rebalancing.
Also there are still balant inconsistency to what CCP is saying it wants ships roles to look like and the actual stats that they are giving the ships. The "support ships" are supposedly weak, but then they give logistic uber resist. At the same time, they give other "support ships" like EW, flimsy EHP and resist and turn them into pure cannon fodder.
Before CCP does anything it needs to do two things:
1. Clearly define where capitals play in the ship rebalancing
2. Clearly define what other changes outside of skill point and traning prerequisits that they are proposing.
yk
I think they're still figuring out HOW they are going to do the rebalancing, by the sounds of it. |
Elbert Ainstein
The Engineer Corp.
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 10:59:00 -
[1886] - Quote
All ships in each class should really just be one basic hull, much like the T3-ships are.
Let ppl customize them like they want them to = role/color/....
Additional ship skills should then be on the role you want the ship to fit.
Would also make more sense about skill reimbursement, to let ppl pick the skills/roles they usually use the ship for today.
Maybe it would actually be possible to make some new roles & skills (ships) for the industial pilots this time too
I'm in this for the money! |
Kill'Boy Bunny
The Illuminatii
Mildly Intoxicated
3
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 11:50:00 -
[1887] - Quote
Been away since last september,
quite a few changes been going on, trying to get up to speed with this now also.
what ever you do CCP please for the love of god test the **** outta it before releasing it
DO A GOOD JOB!
You can do it!! |
Krystyn
Serenity Rising LLC
Vanguard.
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 13:28:00 -
[1888] - Quote
Hmm..why not go the reverse route to racial BC skills. Reduce all the Racial Ships skills down to a generic Battleship, Cruiser and Frigate skill. Then leave the Destroyer and BC skills as they are
And to complain about nerfing the Drake and the whole ship lines idea. Instead of improvements to things we will now have entire lines of useless ships. The whole point of the Drake is the tank. Take that away and you have a lame missile spam ship with a crappy tank that will gather dust in my hangar as I switch to flying ahh (i can't believe I'm saying this) a Can
I want to see a Tech 2 Bantam (and the other races versions too) already as well
I'm slightly exaggerating a bit with the whole post, but lets play a little devil's advocate here. |
tasman devil
Pangalactic Punks n' Playboys
HUN Reloaded
2
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 13:30:00 -
[1889] - Quote
How can I unsubscribe from this bloody thread!?!?!
I like this thread but for the love of God I cannot find the "bloody unsubscribe from topic the hell NOW!" button...
Just a like and a tag as favorite button... Can anyone help me?
Also I am in the process of making a ship tree myself so as to make a point for 96 pages of rage...  |
non judgement
Without Fear
Flying Burning Ships Alliance
750
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 13:39:00 -
[1890] - Quote
94 pages is a lot to go through. Of course I didn't.
Just wanted to ask... Did CCP Soundwave say during the EVE Keynote at fanfest that the ship balancing would take 5 years? |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 72 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |