EVE Search - New Dev Blog: Speed Rebalanced by Nozh

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: Speed Rebalanced by Nozh

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 144 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 15 post(s)
Andnowthenews Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:33:00 - [2701] Originally by: Haniblecter Teg I've been annoyed with nano's ever since the rig patch. They've robbed this game of diversity of fits its soo pationately claimed to be a selling point. The game will be better off imho, and that's why I caps-locked my first celebratory post. Actually a diversely fleet of nueting and sniping BS and BC, webbers, logistics, ewar, long range scrams and fast tacklers piloted by trained ppl and led by a competent and knowledgeable FC would cause a lot of devastation to a roaming nano gang. But as with a lot of things ppl would rather nerf others that have gone through the training than skill up and improve themselves to the same level.
bluebeyond MicroFunks	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:35:00 - [2702] Fking stupid change. Why don't you bother to sort out the actual problems in eve instead of fking up everything that's good about eve.
Pushtan Ministry of Destruction Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:36:00 - [2703] Edited by: Pushtan on 28/07/2008 15:36:30 Originally by: bluebeyond Fking stupid change. Why don't you bother to sort out the actual problems in eve instead of fking up everything that's good about eve. nano*** much? it WAS diverse...but it became mainstream....you idiots made it a problem...not us or CCP
Straife North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:37:00 - [2704] Originally by: Haniblecter Teg If you're thinking about something larger, like 25+ ships or so, then you're looking at a skirmish: larger numbers of people who actualyl want to have a mini fleet fight. I'm pretty sure no one is refering to those numbers, as you want to meet another opposing blob. IF that blobs bigger, then you chose the wrong time to attack (enemies prime time) or a bigger alliance. If that's so, then ya, maybe you should lose. So your confirming that you think the larger blob should always win? Yea that's exactly why I play a game and try to think tactically to confront larger fleets than my own, just so I can be guaranteed to lose or not engage...
bluebeyond MicroFunks	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:38:00 - [2705] Edited by: bluebeyond on 28/07/2008 15:37:56 Originally by: Pushtan Edited by: Pushtan on 28/07/2008 15:36:30 Originally by: bluebeyond Fking stupid change. Why don't you bother to sort out the actual problems in eve instead of fking up everything that's good about eve. nano*** much? it WAS diverse...but it became mainstream....you idiots made it a problem...not us or CCP God it's not my fault i enjoy playing eve. Don't be so stupid...
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:38:00 - [2706] Originally by: Arkady Sadik Hm. After playing around a bit on SiSi, two comments: 1) The MWD reactivation delay is bad. Seriously. (For those without SiSi: If you deactivate your MWD, you can't activate it again for a full cycle of 10 seconds) This might be a nice thing to do to ships that use the MWD speed as a tank against damage, but for the ships that use (need to use) the MWD to keep a certain range - blasters to get close, projectiles (mostly) to stay at range - it's death. You have to react to speed changes of the hostile, and if he just waits for you to deactivate your MWD (which you must to hit anything and to preserve cap), and then activates his, he has 10 seconds to catch up with you (or to get away from you, in the case of blasters). Blasters might be able to use scram to compensate for this, but the projectile user can't. It's already a dangerous dance to stay out of web range while still doing useful amounts of dps (at least in ships that don't get falloff bonus). This is even worse than the effect of overheating, where the other person can overheat his MWD at very bad times for you and you need to wait until the end of the cycle until you counter. The overheating is difficult to use, this is easy to use. Please drop that "feature" :-( 2) Missiles. Most nano ships never out-tracked their opponents, but rather out-ranged them (that's why the badly-tracking, but high-range pulse lasers can hit most current nano ships). Against pulse lasers, you can use tracking disruptors - a single TD, and all is well. Or you use ECM. Against missiles, there is no ewar at all. Not even ECM works usefully (thanks to f.o.f. missiles). Missile boats have been boosted up a lot in the last patches. HAML boost, torp boost, now the speed reduction - this all is adding up to a system that now lacks drawbacks. A while back, missiles were tracking-free, long-range weapons which had the drawback of low dps. The low dps part has been removed (HAMLs and especially torps have very good dps in their weapon classes), and while range is now a small problem for them - 18km effective range for HAMLs, and 25km effective range for torps are both very good ranges for their weapon sizes, but not the longest ones - they have the option to switch to javelins and get about the best ranges with their dps in their respective classes. Missiles need rebalancing. If its like that the MWD reactivation then I must say INCREDBLY stupid thing CCP. And that commign from someoen that support nanonerfs. A vaga thta can go 8 Km/s but with this reactivation delay is FAR FAR FARO WORSE than a vaga that can only go 3 km/s and don have this delay. You simply cannot kite anythign anymore. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Haakelen Gallente Genesis Rising	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:39:00 - [2707] Edited by: Haakelen on 28/07/2008 15:39:00 Countdown until CCP gives in fully to the ***ing whiners and nerfs Recons and Remote Rep, and the remaining skilled members leave. My views and opinions represent my corporation just fine, thanks.*
Tomic The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:39:00 - [2708] Well, I've been on sisi, and despite the devs saying they weren't going to listen to any "kneejerk reactions" the nerf is as bad as everyone thinks. Basically it has made all hacs pretty useless, being easily killed compared to bc/bs which are far cheaper (with insurance) and require less skills to use. WTG CCP!!! You have succeeded in giving us yet ANOTHER useless class of ship.
Pushtan Ministry of Destruction Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:39:00 - [2709] Originally by: bluebeyond Edited by: bluebeyond on 28/07/2008 15:37:56 Originally by: Pushtan Edited by: Pushtan on 28/07/2008 15:36:30 Originally by: bluebeyond Fking stupid change. Why don't you bother to sort out the actual problems in eve instead of fking up everything that's good about eve. nano* much? it WAS diverse...but it became mainstream....you idiots made it a problem...not us or CCP God it's not my fault i enjoy playing eve. Don't be so stupid... so stop ***ing cus youre losing your advantage over other players who chose not to skill up that way and work around the problem...'dont be so stupid'
Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:40:00 - [2710] Originally by: Haakelen Edited by: Haakelen on 28/07/2008 15:31:06 Originally by: Alek Row That was the feature that concerned me the most. How certain ships that have a very small window to do a bit more damage than the opponent will be able to dictate range? Ships able to perma-run the MWD while having no problems doing damage will not suffer from this, ships that have to pulse the MWD to do some damage are affected, wtf? Drop it. If you want to keep the feature than create a heat damaging effect to ships perma running MWD. Edit Or at least give us a skill to decrease the delay. A new skill I need just to use my **ing battleship which has worked fine for a year? No, they should just drop it. Im with ya there, f a new skill. Im kinda skeptical of the need too. After all the speed nerfs, ships are going to be topping out at reasonable speeds already, why do we need the reactivation delay? Is it to prevent people from reactivating their MWD after they've been snared by a warp disrupter on the gate? To stop them from using momentum to carry them out of the range and just reactivating the MWD? That could be a problem, maybe, guess testing will tell. but im thinking 10 seconds is too long, something like 5 or less would be more reasonable. ----------------- Friends Forever**

Polinus Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:42:00 - [2711] Originally by: Haakelen Originally by: Haniblecter Teg Im sorry, didnt realize we're talking about making a solopwn mobile. The Ishtar is the slowest HAC and turns the worst. Its weapon system is the only one that can be shot at and destroyed. It is heavily reliant on cap boosters. How the **** is that a solo ship? Because it can deal 100% of its dps independent form his own speed. That is a very good thing.
Andnowthenews Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:43:00 - [2712] Originally by: Haniblecter Teg Now, defending is getting the roaming gang to leave your area or destroy them. No alliance is going to camp its ingress/egress systems 24/7. If you've managed to stay in an alliances region long enough for them to camp you that strong at a specific point ahead of you, then shame on you. Also, so what, they've camped you at a system using jump bridges. Welp, move to another system to leave. Or, if they have multiple regions, move through a jump that's longer than 5ly (jump bridges have limited range) and you'll defeat their jump ahead strategy. Most skilled pvpers want to fight a gang that outnumbers them cos they have the piloting skill and knowledge to do it so they specifically hang around areas so a good sized gang can be formed. The type of gangs that are looking for solo ganks can do what you say but those looking for a mid sized gang battle need to stick around for the opposing gang to form up. But with this nerf the formed gang need only jump to and camp choke points to totally **** the roaming gang with capitals and a bubbled gate. Most alliances have JB chains linking various systems its not hard and its a lot quicker to use then to cut off a gang than to go through the gates. I do not know how you cannot see how this nerf will reduce the amount and quality of pvp in eve unless its because you do not want to cos it will; make your ratting and home systems so much safer.
Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:44:00 - [2713] Originally by: Andnowthenews Originally by: Haniblecter Teg I've been annoyed with nano's ever since the rig patch. They've robbed this game of diversity of fits its soo pationately claimed to be a selling point. The game will be better off imho, and that's why I caps-locked my first celebratory post. Actually a diversely fleet of nueting and sniping BS and BC, webbers, logistics, ewar, long range scrams and fast tacklers piloted by trained ppl and led by a competent and knowledgeable FC would cause a lot of devastation to a roaming nano gang. But as with a lot of things ppl would rather nerf others that have gone through the training than skill up and improve themselves to the same level. The thread has moved away from that argument as its unsustainable. To even catch the nano gang you'll need an amount of nano's equal to the nanogang or a ton of nano'd huginns/rapier. Once those guys are locked down, sure, use the support. OFc, those nano's are now 150km off the gate by now. So why even bring other ships, when your gang can more effectively kill the speed freaks with even mroe speed freaks. You just cant lock down the buggers without more of teh buggers; they can just always fly away. That's the problem. ----------------- Friends Forever
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:45:00 - [2714] Originally by: Straife Originally by: Haniblecter Teg If you're thinking about something larger, like 25+ ships or so, then you're looking at a skirmish: larger numbers of people who actualyl want to have a mini fleet fight. I'm pretty sure no one is refering to those numbers, as you want to meet another opposing blob. IF that blobs bigger, then you chose the wrong time to attack (enemies prime time) or a bigger alliance. If that's so, then ya, maybe you should lose. So your confirming that you think the larger blob should always win? Yea that's exactly why I play a game and try to think tactically to confront larger fleets than my own, just so I can be guaranteed to lose or not engage... Wait, this statement of yours can go both ways. If I were to confront a gang of nanos on my Raven should I also have a chance to win against them? Because at the moment that is definitely not the case. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Haakelen Gallente Genesis Rising	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:46:00 - [2715] Originally by: Exlegion Wait, this statement of yours can go both ways. If I were to confront a gang of nanos on my Raven should I also have a chance to win against them? Because at the moment that is definitely not the case. Hydra member crying about his raven dis is me lollin My views and opinions represent my corporation just fine, thanks.
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:48:00 - [2716] Edited by: Exlegion on 28/07/2008 15:50:50 Originally by: Haakelen Originally by: Exlegion Wait, this statement of yours can go both ways. If I were to confront a gang of nanos on my Raven should I also have a chance to win against them? Because at the moment that is definitely not the case. Hydra member crying about his raven dis is me lollin Once you're done "lollin" would you care in answering the question? Edit: By the way, I can act just as immature as you and accuse you of crying about your nano. But I'm hoping we can keep this conversation between adults. Otherwise take your alliance biggotry to CAOD. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Andnowthenews Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:50:00 - [2717] Edited by: Andnowthenews on 28/07/2008 15:51:46 Originally by: Exlegion Originally by: Haakelen Originally by: Exlegion Wait, this statement of yours can go both ways. If I were to confront a gang of nanos on my Raven should I also have a chance to win against them? Because at the moment that is definitely not the case. Hydra member crying about his raven dis is me lollin Once you're done "lollin" would you care in answering the question? If it was a gang of heavily tanked BC's with ECM would you be crying for a nerf just cos they could beat you as well?. Any well balanced or unbalanced gang for that matter could kill a solo ratting raven bud.
Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:50:00 - [2718] Originally by: Straife Originally by: Haniblecter Teg If you're thinking about something larger, like 25+ ships or so, then you're looking at a skirmish: larger numbers of people who actualyl want to have a mini fleet fight. I'm pretty sure no one is refering to those numbers, as you want to meet another opposing blob. IF that blobs bigger, then you chose the wrong time to attack (enemies prime time) or a bigger alliance. If that's so, then ya, maybe you should lose. So your confirming that you think the larger blob should always win? Yea that's exactly why I play a game and try to think tactically to confront larger fleets than my own, just so I can be guaranteed to lose or not engage... OKs. So, assuming everything is equal, and assuming some randomness with hits and such, you're claiming that a fleet of strength 1, should have a good chance against another fleet that has a sizeable size advantage? Like a fleet that's half again bigger? Twice? Again, everything equal. In addition, Im assuming you're claiming that a smaller nano-gang can beat odds that are much greater? First of all, why should one ship be that much stronger. Second, nanos could never do that feat to begin with. They dont have the DPS, and just CANT lock down a fleet that is that much stronger. If you have 10-20 nano zipping around a fleet of 50, and that fleet just cant hit them, they're not going to stay and let you needle them to death. And lets say your nanogang gets 2 or 3 kills on that superior gang, and that gang realizes its futile and leaves the system. Have you won? Or have you annoyed the opposing gang to leaving? ----------------- Friends Forever
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:54:00 - [2719] Originally by: Andnowthenews Edited by: Andnowthenews on 28/07/2008 15:51:46 Originally by: Exlegion Originally by: Haakelen Originally by: Exlegion Wait, this statement of yours can go both ways. If I were to confront a gang of nanos on my Raven should I also have a chance to win against them? Because at the moment that is definitely not the case. Hydra member crying about his raven dis is me lollin Once you're done "lollin" would you care in answering the question? If it was a gang of heavily tanked BC's with ECM would you be crying for a nerf just cos they could beat you as well?. Any well balanced or unbalanced gang for that matter could kill a solo ratting raven bud. Straife said: Quote: So your confirming that you think the larger blob should always win? Yea that's exactly why I play a game and try to think tactically to confront larger fleets than my own, just so I can be guaranteed to lose or not engage... You have answered his question then. All he has to do is replace "Raven" with "nano". One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:55:00 - [2720] I startign to think we shoudl have 1 thread in features forum for each feature on this NERF patch. So we can be clear on what we like what we dislike etc. Woudl make much easier for devs to get the whole reaction picture. I for once liked every thing but HATED 100% the MWD reactivation delay. THAt single change really kills minmatar completely. No more kiting. The enemy just need to wait you shut your MWD off 1 cycle then they activate their own and will ALWAYS catch you before you can reactivate yours. is there a secret agenda to completely remove all tempests from the game? because this seems the case with this change. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough

Andnowthenews Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:56:00 - [2721] Originally by: Haniblecter Teg Originally by: Straife Originally by: Haniblecter Teg If you're thinking about something larger, like 25+ ships or so, then you're looking at a skirmish: larger numbers of people who actualyl want to have a mini fleet fight. I'm pretty sure no one is refering to those numbers, as you want to meet another opposing blob. IF that blobs bigger, then you chose the wrong time to attack (enemies prime time) or a bigger alliance. If that's so, then ya, maybe you should lose. So your confirming that you think the larger blob should always win? Yea that's exactly why I play a game and try to think tactically to confront larger fleets than my own, just so I can be guaranteed to lose or not engage... OKs. So, assuming everything is equal, and assuming some randomness with hits and such, you're claiming that a fleet of strength 1, should have a good chance against another fleet that has a sizeable size advantage? Like a fleet that's half again bigger? Twice? Again, everything equal. In addition, Im assuming you're claiming that a smaller nano-gang can beat odds that are much greater? First of all, why should one ship be that much stronger. Second, nanos could never do that feat to begin with. They dont have the DPS, and just CANT lock down a fleet that is that much stronger. If you have 10-20 nano zipping around a fleet of 50, and that fleet just cant hit them, they're not going to stay and let you needle them to death. And lets say your nanogang gets 2 or 3 kills on that superior gang, and that gang realizes its futile and leaves the system. Have you won? Or have you annoyed the opposing gang to leaving? You have given them a education on how to bring the correct ships for the right job. Why should every engagement end in one side losing all or most of its ships?. Some of the most entertaining ang tactical fights ive had in eve ended with each side only losing a couple of ships but the maneuvering and repositioning, use of ewar and sheer piloting fun that we had was worth a thousand f1-f8 slug fests.
Aya The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:57:00 - [2722] Edited by: Aya on 28/07/2008 16:00:26 Edited by: Aya on 28/07/2008 15:57:14 Nerfing nanos is going to nerf one major factor of pvp in this game and thats bumping. Test server Machariel that was doing 13km/sec is now down to 3.3km/sec. Before everyone cheers, everyone needs to remeber that at the moment the only counter to station camping Capitals is bumping them off. Unfortunatley your standard nanoship cannot accomplish this very easily and by nerfing these very rare, very expensive, and paper thin ships you will be nerfing the consequences that come with people wanting to station camp in carriers. Some stations have ridicoulas dock ranges up to 49km long (TVN and BWF) in which the locals regurally exploit this in order to scare off the hostile fleets with minimal losses. Even with nanoships at the moment it is nearly impossible to bump them outside of their own dock range and now stations with 5km or 10km dock ranges will become just as impossible. By nerfing nano hacs you will eliminate the fear of people to undock in heavily tanked battleships and station camp with them. Station camping will become the new eve pvp along with massive blobs and little consequence for people who want to undock and fire missiles at a their target til they need to deagress and dock.
teji	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:58:00 - [2723] When they said that they were looking in to assault frigates. You thought that they were going to make assault frigates actually useful. They really meant that they were going to nerf everything to be as useless as assault frigates.
Johncrab Minmatar XBeyond	Posted - 2008.07.28 15:58:00 - [2724] You guys really can't use common sense can you Why the revolution ffs Remove nanos from game, 90% of speed fitts will lose some 25% top speed. We have overdrives for speed and istabs for agility, why do we still have nanofibers when we want to nerf speed? Funny thing that you guys implement FW with complexes where you can and should use mwd... everyone uses mwd, a few whines later... let's make a revolution in pvp guys! We are bored, don't feel like fixing the server for now, let's do something totally new!!! /sound of claping around the office
Haakelen Gallente Genesis Rising	Posted - 2008.07.28 16:01:00 - [2725] Originally by: Aya By nerfing nano hacs you will eliminate the fear of people to undock in heavily tanked battleships and station camp with them. Station camping will become the new eve pvp along with massive blobs and little consequence for people who want to undock and fire missiles at a their target til they need to deagress and dock. Even if the server could handle the kind of ridiculous blobs you're going to need to kill heavily tanked ships before they can deagress, how is that fun? And don't say 'increase the aggression timer' either, that's the same ***ing 'fix the symptom not the cause' shit that CCP keeps doing and ruining the game. My views and opinions represent my corporation just fine, thanks.*
Cutesmile	Posted - 2008.07.28 16:02:00 - [2726] A try it the sis, i say it this is a bllsht. The Rogue Cy-2 implant goes to 6 from 7 slot and cant use with MY-2 implant. My Vaga and AF (jaguar with polycarbon) turn like a BC lol.
Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer	Posted - 2008.07.28 16:02:00 - [2727] Originally by: Andnowthenews Edited by: Andnowthenews on 28/07/2008 15:48:07 Originally by: Haniblecter Teg Now, defending is getting the roaming gang to leave your area or destroy them. No alliance is going to camp its ingress/egress systems 24/7. If you've managed to stay in an alliances region long enough for them to camp you that strong at a specific point ahead of you, then shame on you. Also, so what, they've camped you at a system using jump bridges. Welp, move to another system to leave. Or, if they have multiple regions, move through a jump that's longer than 5ly (jump bridges have limited range) and you'll defeat their jump ahead strategy. Most skilled pvpers want to fight a gang that outnumbers or has at least equal numbers as them cos they have the piloting skill and knowledge to do it and enjoy it. So they specifically hang around areas so a good sized gang can be formed. The type of gangs that are looking for solo ganks can do what you say but those looking for a mid sized gang battle need to stick around for the opposing gang to form up. But with this nerf the formed gang need only jump to and camp choke points to totally rpe the roaming gang with capitals and a bubbled gate. Most alliances have JB chains linking various systems its not hard and its a lot quicker to use them to cut off a gang than to go through the gates. I do not know how you cannot see how this nerf will reduce the amount and quality of pvp in eve unless its because you do not want to cos it will make your ratting and home systems so much safer. "Most skilled pvpers want to fight a gang that outnumbers or has at least equal numbers as them cos they have the piloting skill and knowledge to do it and enjoy it. So they specifically hang around areas so a good sized gang can be formed." So they stick around for the opposing side to form up and get what they want? Where's the problem? "But with this nerf the formed gang need only jump to and camp choke points to totally rpe the roaming gang with capitals and a bubbled gate." So teh gang that's looking for a fight finds teh fight they were looking for. Mission accomplished. "Most alliances have JB chains linking various systems its not hard and its a lot quicker to use them to cut off a gang than to go through the gates. " Yap. But there's more than one way to leave a region. They camp something, go another way. Log off/on. Putz around behind the camp. IDK, do stuff. If you're under 10 pilots, do you think you're going to rouse a 150 pilot response? That the egress system is going to be bubbled wup with 50 pilots while there's two 50man gangs roaming around looking for you? Essentially, your agrument is you need nano's to beat gate camps. because gate camps are alot more prevalent now because people can jump bridge ahead of you to choke points. My argument is avoid the gate camps with scouts, who will tell you whats coming up (they're the inties that can beat gate camps still). Move to another egress system. Chances are that larger, superior gang that is camping the one system is going to get wise to you moving (unless you got a tail thats REALLY good) for a while. So its not like they're going to move instantly to the correct egress system your FC has chosen to leave teh region. That's assuming they have the JB's to that system. Essentially, Im arguing that roaming gangs think a bit now. ----------------- Friends Forever
Andnowthenews Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.07.28 16:02:00 - [2728] Originally by: Exlegion You have answered his question then. All he has to do is replace "Raven" with "nano". We are talking about gang fighting and your bleating that you ratting raven is not a gang pwning tactical beast?. Oh look a hydra member lol...NVM.
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.28 16:12:00 - [2729] Originally by: Andnowthenews Originally by: Exlegion You have answered his question then. All he has to do is replace "Raven" with "nano". We are talking about gang fighting and your bleating that you ratting raven is not a gang pwning tactical beast?. Oh look a hydra member lol...NVM. No. I'm pointing out that a gang of nanos currently has the ability of taking out smaller size to same size gangs and escaping larger gangs when the numbers stack against them. A smaller gang of ships (none nano'd)don't get the option of escaping the larger gang of nanos. With the nerf a gang of nanos is now positioned so that if a larger "fish" comes along you will have the same chance as the smaller fishes you've been preying on. And again, about the Hydra comments, would you care in taking that to CAOD as this is a discussion on nanos, not on how much you hate Hydra. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Dinkytot Brutor tribe	Posted - 2008.07.28 16:13:00 - [2730] Edited by: Dinkytot on 28/07/2008 16:14:48 Edited by: Dinkytot on 28/07/2008 16:14:03 With that changes most ppl will only go into PvP with other ppl if they have more pilots then the opponent fleet. Certainly ppl in Minmatar ships will only count as a half pilot.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 144 :: 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.