| 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 .. 73 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
   |
Posted - 2008.07.27 21:17:00 -
[751]
Those of you who supported this thread and DID NOT CLICK "Check Here If You Want To Give Support to the idea/discussion going on" located bellow your "Smiley" faces - go back and edit the post, and click on that button.
If we do not "win" by virtue of popular demand, at least this issue will have to be raised to CSM and CCP, and thus we will get at least an overview and PROPER BALANCING of the proposed changes, as opposed to the unilateral and heavy handed approach CCP has chosen now.
|
Vortices
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 21:43:00 -
[752]
against this nerf
|
Leeloo Gainsborough
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 21:44:00 -
[753]
Against |
DeathStarRunner
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 21:47:00 -
[754]
against
|
Darkstar BP
eXceed Inc.
eXceed.
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 21:48:00 -
[755]
Against in the form it is presented today
|
Phelanwolf
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 21:49:00 -
[756]
Edited by: Phelanwolf on 27/07/2008 21:49:30
Against
|
AJ Lootar
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 21:50:00 -
[757]
Do not nerf nano, small gangs without nano will be very difficult to have fun and at blobs days that we are choices will be very short
|
Mistmare
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 21:55:00 -
[758]
AGAINST
|
swinghammer
Black Omega Security
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 21:57:00 -
[759]
Against. |
Ask Unbeatable
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:03:00 -
[760]
hello
|
DanMck
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:09:00 -
[761]
Edited by: DanMck on 27/07/2008 22:09:43
against !
|
b'ast
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:12:00 -
[762]
definately against. poorly planned reactive tactics as always.
|
noltox
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:13:00 -
[763]
against. the death of small gang warfare 
|
Ben Booley
Mutually Assured Distraction
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:13:00 -
[764]
I think nanos, in their current form, are overpowered, however this nerf hits them too hard, removing one of the few viable methods for small gangs to exist, particularly considering the state of both lowsec and 0.0, with them both inhabited by blobs that the smaller gangs need to get away from. Also, this nerf is too wide-reaching and changes too many different mechanics, making me fear that it will hurt the viability of blaster ships and cruiser hulls in general, as they can't tank enough damage to engage larger targets, nor can they avoid damage anymore.
|
Ruze
Amarr
No Applicable Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:14:00 -
[765]
 Originally by: Jinx Barker
Those of you who supported this thread and DID NOT CLICK "Check Here If You Want To Give Support to the idea/discussion going on" located bellow your "Smiley" faces - go back and edit the post, and click on that button.
If we do not "win" by virtue of popular demand, at least this issue will have to be raised to CSM and CCP, and thus we will get at least an overview and PROPER BALANCING of the proposed changes, as opposed to the unilateral and heavy handed approach CCP has chosen now.
Hah! We can win in an internet forum argument? Frickin' awesome!
Oh, I definitely want to see a NEW vote go up about two weeks after the changes have been in test. Only those who have gone on SiSi can vote. That might actually be a vote worth 'winning.'
Hahahahaha!!!
Genesis Project |
Woulvesbaine
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:15:00 -
[766]
Against nano nerf - with all my active accounts. CCP - this is the type of mistake that will alienate such a large part of your base that you will irreparably damage the game and your subscriptions will fall precipitously.
Just remember when Lucas had already screwed up SWG and they made radical changes they alienated their remaining subscription base causing subscriptions to tank lower then their lowest lows.
Other sci-fi MMO's are under way and Eve helps distinguish itself from these offerings (some of them not yet so public) in part by its rich and diverse combat system. Take that away and lave this game's subscriber base that much more ripe for the poaching.
|
Hieronimus Rex
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:19:00 -
[767]
Originally by: noltox
against. the death of small gang warfare
Small gang warfare died a long time ago with POS and capships.
|
Jin Fenix
Xenobytes
Stain Empire
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:19:00 -
[768]
SUPPORT THIS THREAD
|
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:21:00 -
[769]
Originally by: Ruze
Hah! We can win in an internet forum argument? Frickin' awesome!
Oh, I definitely want to see a NEW vote go up about two weeks after the changes have been in test. Only those who have gone on SiSi can vote. That might actually be a vote worth 'winning.'
Hahahahaha!!!
Erhm... OK.... 
*Backs away slowly.....
|
L Cross
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:26:00 -
[770]
Signed against. Proposed changes would change the game to much and favour blob warfare.
|
Necrophorus
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 23:00:00 -
[771]
against! |
Pherusa Plumosa
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 23:01:00 -
[772]
balancing is ok, but this nerf is no balance.
__________________________________________________
|
Sub Kil
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 23:05:00 -
[773]
AGAINST the nano nerf!
|
DarkGalaxy
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 23:08:00 -
[774]
Against
|
Chr0nosX
Ore Mongers
Black Hand.
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 23:10:00 -
[775]
Edited by: Chr0nosX on 27/07/2008 23:10:21
Against
|
Darestelm
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 23:45:00 -
[776]
Against!
|
Ceron Dunkae
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 23:47:00 -
[777]
Against
|
eragon alseen
Black Omega Security
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 23:51:00 -
[778]
whats going on in here
|
Jubal Yearly
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 23:52:00 -
[779]
nerf is bad
|
Ruyman
Princeps Corp
T e r c i o s
|
Posted - 2008.07.28 00:05:00 -
[780]
I support this topic.
Although I aprove some little changes in nano nerf, this measure looks like too, too, too much more than it's needed.
November Bellicose |
| |
|
| 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 .. 73 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |