| 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 80 .. 88 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Bobbechk
Vigilante inc.
   |
Posted - 2008.07.29 08:35:00 -
[511]
hai lets rename eve to: Drakes and Ravens Online
|
KISOGOKU
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 08:37:00 -
[512]
I saw alot missile nerf untl today and i never whined , tech2 cruise nerf , javelin nerf , revelation nerf .Do you know revelation nerf ?It was another missile nerf brought by speed rigs -tech2 speed mods ,now CCP fixing their fault made at revelation and you are whining.
Btw myr and domi much better passive tankers than caldri ships 
 Originally by: Taya Tal
So I guess when they nerf the **** out of missiles and passive shield tanks you will take it like a big boy too? I guess you'll just have to take it like a big boy when you find out your CNR can now tank 130 dps? (Of course CCP will never do this since they seem to love caldari and hate Minmatar).
|
Angry Sama
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 08:38:00 -
[513]
welp
i can say that i like it.
but it is not perfect, you know.
i think changing mwd boost to 550% would be great(inties will be able not to die so fast, 'cause 5k m\s is way too slow for them atm, and it will not affect larger ships greatly, all we know that speed-tanking-hacs use domination or gistum mwd nowadays) and matari recons need changes imho. maybe bonuses to web's velocity factor would be cool. and you can make velocity factor bonus on rapier and velocity\range bonus on huginn - similar to curse and pilgrim.
thx, that's all for now ;)
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 08:40:00 -
[514]
Things I like:
-Speeds generally lower
-Speeds mods stack with each other
-Polycarbons brought inline with other rigs
-Snakes/Claymore give less bonuses
Things I don't like:
-You can no longer tackle
-Drones and missiles can still hit...which obsolete small, fast tacklers
-Overdrives and basic T2 speed mods given a harsh 37.5% nerf
-10 second reactivation delay on MWDs
-ABs a bit too slow still
-With speeds of ships being soo close, overheat of +50% speed and +30% to webbing range makes it too easy to catch nano ships. Nano-ships are no longer uber-duber so they don't need to be caught so easily. You cannot overheat your MWD in reaction to enemy overheat as it happens on the cycle.
-Minmatar not boosted so they can somewhat speed tank. When you nerfed drones, you gave Gallente ships more drone bay like the myrm, but minmatar are getting the shaft.
Overall I kind of like the new speeds on SiSi. I can still use nano-tactics, but the main problem is that tacklers are so easily killed that ranged warfare is a lot harder than it used to be. I guess I can just train moar dictor alts, but that's a pita.
I really would like CCP to look at Heavy/Cruise missile damage and range and what exactly they can hit. Especially heavy missiles need looking at, they do very high damage (comparatively to other missile systems) have the best range and can hit just about anything under these new rules. Current anti-missile ewar (defender missiles) is completely broken and unused and needs to be changed more like Tracking disruptors. For example, TDs never hit autocanons, so TDs were boosted to affect them. Nothing affects missiles so shouldn't something be put in the game to affect them? Makes sense, right?
--
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
Zhilan Alaioki
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 08:43:00 -
[515]
First off, let me start by explaining why I joined KIA. I've been playing EVE for quite a while now and I've tried out quite a few aspects of the game. One of the greatest appeals of EVE for me has always been that you don't always need to invest tons of time to get anything done, that you don't always need 50+ people to accomplish your goals, but can also have fun in small gangs of 3<x<10 people.
I just don't have enough time to wait for 30 people to get their asses in gear and travel 15 jumps in tanked ships and then travel another 15 jumps in a tanked fleet to get anywhere near a fight. I also don't like those laggy blob situation, although they can be fun from time to time.
In KIA I get both and lots of opportunities even for solo PVP, but anyone who has ever done this KNOWS that in 0.0 its basically impossible to go PVP in anything that's not able to run away quickly if needed. Nano gangs aren't just about going fast in combat, they are about being able to run from blobs of remote repped ships or from small defense gangs that will inevitably be formed to run off the invader and those fleets will be able to use JUMP BRIDGES. So yes, we fly nano ships, but why is that becoming something you have to apologize for?
Nano ships are not an "i win" button, they are really hard to fly well and die horribly quickly if you ever get caught, but that makes them FUN because its risky, but if you're good you stand the moderate chance of killing something and getting away afterwards.
Removing nano ships that can outrun tanked ships both in combat and when running away or making it really, really hard is just going to make it nearly impossible to go hunt in small gangs or solo. I have no idea why people complain about the Vagabond for example. Yes, its not easy to catch, but without polycarbons and snakes it just goes 5k, which is a speed at which every inty can catch it and any Rapier is a mortal threat. Its not as if they're invincible, we kill them every other day and we also lose some often enough.
Those few ships that were going stupidly fast and were near invincible should probably be looked at and yes, maybe nano ships are a bit too powerful, so yes they need a slight nerf. I just don't see why speed tanking should suddenly become impossible or a not really viable alternative, especially since its nearly all Minmatar ships can do well.
A speed tank is extremely fragile, because its not really a tank. Once you're slowed down, your survival time is measured in seconds. Show me one tanked ship that can be countered by using only one module like a webber.. and yes, a Curse will break any active tank, but the passive ones are also quite respectable and then there's remote reps. If you've ever been in a nano fleet that's had a close encounter with a remote repped fleet, you'll probably have been slapped badly as I have been on occasion.
Please don't take this solo play away from us CCP, I don't want this to be a game in which only the biggest alliances really stand a chance in a fight or in which I have to completely write off every ship I take out to roam from the start. Im not saying don't nerf nano modules or ships, but please don't nerf them into uselessness..
|
Azilia Nefetti
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 08:44:00 -
[516]
Only thing i dont really like is the -% to web speed,
its a bit low now.
70-80% would of been reasonable.
|
sakana
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 08:58:00 -
[517]
These changes are pretty hilarious, especially since they only really hurt solo/very small gang roamers while ensuring that greater numbers, as always, means victory.
|
Ebodhisatva
The Templars Knights
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 09:20:00 -
[518]
I tried to run a mission with a kronos with a single domination webifier (used to do 99% @15km, now it does 75%)
Couldn't hit a frig with my 425mm t2 rails.
I tried to run a mission with a kronos with dual domination webifier
Couldn't hit a frig with my 425mm t2 rails.
|
Uzuki Shootmenow
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 09:22:00 -
[519]
[ 2008.07.28 21:58:45 ] CCP Atropos > it's simple really?
[ 2008.07.28 21:58:52 ] CCP Atropos > when it becomes the de facto method for fighting?
[ 2008.07.28 21:58:55 ] CCP Atropos > it needs ot be nerfed?
well, then, you should start looking at:
- T2 long range battleships (standard really)
- Dreadnaughts (pos warfare)
Anything else I missed? (other than the name change... to Caldari online)
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 09:27:00 -
[520]
Ishtar fittings now need to be looked at a bit. Now that it can't nano and needs to actually tank... it doesn't have the grid & cpu for it. Typically, you'll have to leave the highs empty. End result: it ends up looking very sad compared to an ordinary t1 Dominix.
Give it some more grid & CPU, and it might have a chance.
|
|
|
Marzzola
Minmatar
Macabre Votum
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 09:28:00 -
[521]
This patch is too many changes at once and will kill the way many people choose to play the game, instead of balancing it. start with small changes then keep going. The game is old enough where the game mechanics should be settling down with out huge changes to how many people play the game (see: this patch). People have found a fun way of playing the game (nanos) which happens have a great advantage over many other styles of game play. This proposed patch will effectively kill nano ships instead of creating a balance between the styles of game play. By taking less drastic measures, CCP can balance nanos compared to the other methods of game play available to the players.
CCP stated they were trying to get rid of nano ships reaching "ludicrous speeds" Not only did they get rid of the ludicrous speed nano ships, but made it so we are unable to make a nano ship in the speed range which was not deemed as ludicrous.
a "standard" nano ship going 3-4.5k/s would not be ludicrous. Turrets would track and they don't outrun missles or light drones. The problems start once you get your ship going over 5k/s.
If CCP could tweek it so a t2 fit vaga with t1 polycarbs max out at around 4.5 k/s, and the rest of the HAC's fall in line behind that, there will be balance between the classes of ships. If someone wants to spend the money on a full set of snakes have those setups top out at 5-5.5k/s. Ships going these speeds will have the advantage which the players deserve for spending more money on their setup, but will no longer be the uncatchable ships which they are today.
tweek polycarbs and snakes first, then stacking penalties for nano's and overdrives until balanced speed limits are reached. Adjust the stacking penalties based on hull size, so frigs and destroyer hulls will still have the speed they need. If done properly, intys would not change very much and will be able to chase down any nano ship and get a point/web/scram on it.
In addition:
undo the nerf to webs and keep the bonus to scrams. People will have two excellent tools for locking down nano ships, in addition to heavy neuts, remote rep BS gangs, etc, With the lower speeds, turrets missles and drones will now be able to put damage on nano ships which would be mitigated by speed, thus "tanked".
Guerilla warfare will live on. Nano gangs will be able to pick and choose their targets which will mostly be small ganks (and if you're getting ganked by nano ships now, you're just going to get ganked by something else later). This way if a nano gang attempts to take on a fleet which has them outclassed they will run a higher risk of taking heavy losses. In the end, more ships will go boom, which is what we all really want.
That is my main point, and you do not need to continue reading if you don't feel like it.
In my own little dream world I would like to see gangs revolve around BS sticking together as heavy hitters along with BC's for anti-support. Frigs/intys/dictors as dedicated as tacklers and cruisers/HAC/Recons being speedy and able to switch between heavy tackle and anti-support as needed. But to fulfill this role cruisers need the option of speed, which if this patch goes through the way it is cruisers will no longer have that ability. If a nano gang composed of only cruiser and frig hulls engages a properly structured gang they will get killed. And to be quite honest the game is pretty damn close to being that. The nano ships we currently have as standard fits just need their speed reduced to a reasonable range, not nerfed into oblivion like it is with this proposed patch. CCP just needs to spend the time running the numbers to get it right.
TBH this seems like a lazy man's patch to fixing such an important aspect of the game we love. CCP needs to spend more time on this issue instead of throwing a sledge hammer at it like this patch will do.
|
Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 09:54:00 -
[522]
so I had a quick tour around Sisi just now, only tested max speeds with my skills on a crow. please take these remarks only for frigate sized modules, I had not a look on others.
1. I quite like the cap penalty variation on the MWDs. Also the reactivation delay variation is nice, but it only affects faction/deadspace MWDs. I do NOT like the speed invariance. t2 should be at least 15% faster than t1 with named inbetween.
2. comparing same thrust MWDs in EFT and on Sisi, I lost 16.8% of top speed. Compared to T2 TQ MWD setup with same speed modules, I lost 23.4% top speed. That is too much. I could stomach a 15% speed reduction (even the 16.8% is quite ok).
3. The MWD reactivation delay should scale by MWD size. 1MN - 2-4 seconds, 10MN - 5-7 second, 100MN - 8-10 seconds. 10 seconds for a frigate or destroyer are a death sentence.
4. Ballance vs turrets does not seem skewed that much, but missiles will slaughter smaller classes ships left, right and center. Also combat drones got boosted by this (tho you have to use the right class of drones for the right class of ship).
5. I quite like the scram and web change, but ships with MWD cap bonus should now get a web strength bonus (or web range). Since these are only blaster boats, it should be ok for them.
6. the implant changes are silly.
The best setup to me now seems a combat ceptor with AB and tank. It should be able to take on turret cruisers quite decently and will be killed by missile/drone cruisers.
In the current status, I am AGAINST this change (err ... nerf) as a whole. The web/scram change along with a tone down of top MWD thrust and change of polycarbon rigs is enough IMO. Snakes should be toned down a bit, but I mean a BIT. Can't comment on the command skills/ships/links change, no experience there.
--- SIG ---
CSM: your support is needed ! |
Demon Johnson
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 10:00:00 -
[523]
First look: (testing Dominix and Thorax setups)
GREAT!!!
Really. Looks like we might get our paper, scissors, stone back.
|
Hul'ka
Minmatar
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 10:02:00 -
[524]
Originally by: Demon Johnson
First look: (testing Dominix and Thorax setups)
GREAT!!!
Really. Looks like we might get our paper, scissors, stone back.
care to elaborate? Since all the anti nerf guys give some nice examples what's sucky sucky now...
---------
I want to phew phew
|
Jasai Kameron
Hakata Group
Blade.
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 10:13:00 -
[525]
Wish I had EVE right now.
Somewhere near the beginning of the thread someone said that Assault Frigs in SISI can beat turret cruisers, due to the nerfed webs (60%). Would make sense then that an HAC would now have a chance against a battleship, particularly if its using an afterburner.
Can't test it myself, but might be worth taking a look at, as its a non-nano way for HAC to be useful.
|
0uch
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 10:29:00 -
[526]
bah, this nerf is no good if it goes through, you are totally taking away guerilla warfare, no small roaming gangs anymore in hostile 0.0. Basically for me you are taking the fun away because that's the only way i still like to play..
you want to get ppl into 0.0, lots of people leave big 0.0 alliances after a while because lagfests in fleet are no fun. now you are taking away the ability of small roaming gangs to hurt alliances, so you basically want us all back in big fleets if you want to target an alliance = more lag.
end game for me
|
XxAngelxX
Amarr
The Illuminati.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 10:52:00 -
[527]
Ok I went on sisi and shot a few things in my BS and it was fun except if I ever took my BS out on TQ I'd have lost it after taking an hour to find someone to fight and then getting blobbed, jammed and instapopped.
This patch, whilst good for the casual PVPer (NPCs/Mines/Station spins all day until someone comes into their space) is not good for those who need to cover territory quickly to find fights, and not spend hours logged off because they are camped in.
The anti-nanos main reason for nerfing them is that "they shouldn't be able to disengage from a fight"... Well anyone who's smart will disengage. RR BS will de-agro and jump out, snipers will warp, station huggers will dock etc etc. Those that dont judge correctly will die, same with nano hacs. God knows I've lost about 10 snaked domi vagas because of mistakes I've made.
So, the argument is moot. Today I insta popped some intys with a pulsepoc. Was pretty cool, time to camp a choke point gate and play another game while there's no targets, because i sure as hell am not going 100 jumps in a BS, or a 200mill hac that im going to lose the first camp i jump into.
--------------------------------------
Dance Puppets, Dance |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 10:55:00 -
[528]
I 've been conducting ome fightign between my alts in battleships.
More than anyoen else i want AB to become an usefull thing in PVP. With the web reduction they are ALMOST there. I really think you guys need to boost their speed bonus a TINY bit extra 10%.
I 've been conducting tests with simualted contition to achieve that. ( ai am not webed but i control my own max speed to be as if i was webbed. With current values my tempest orbitting at 3 km is stil hit by >90% of a blaster mega shots. By increasign the speed 10% this goes down to 75% ( gross calculations made based on how may hits on each 20 shots observed in logs).
I wish i had someoen that can fly an astarte or similar ship to help me test the correlation on the medium gunned ships usign AB as an attempt to speed tank.
My major suggestion. You want to make MWD a burst stuff to approach and not keep turned all time? Then make so that whiel MWD is on ships loose HALF their agility (you know you can pretty much compensate the acceleration issue dangling with the added mass of the MWD and the thrust). That would make MWD stil very good for blaster ships, since they need to run in straight line, but very bad for orbiting. On other hand i would even ADD some agility to AB turned on.
That would make a clear distinction on how to use AB and MWD.
-------------------------------------------------
If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 11:03:00 -
[529]
Originally by: Azilia Nefetti
Only thing i dont really like is the -% to web speed,
its a bit low now.
70-80% would of been reasonable.
naa in fact its pretty good. Go test on the server. Works very well with the idea tha AB shoudl be usefull an AB ship whiel webbed still reach its nominal base speed. While MWD ships if webbed and scrammed are in way worse situation. The 50-60% is key to make AB usefull again (sicne speed tanking agaisnt turrets can only be achiebved in VERY close ranges now).
-------------------------------------------------
If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Haakelen
Gallente
Genesis Rising
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 11:08:00 -
[530]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Originally by: Azilia Nefetti
Only thing i dont really like is the -% to web speed,
its a bit low now.
70-80% would of been reasonable.
naa in fact its pretty good. Go test on the server. Works very well with the idea tha AB shoudl be usefull an AB ship whiel webbed still reach its nominal base speed. While MWD ships if webbed and scrammed are in way worse situation. The 50-60% is key to make AB usefull again (sicne speed tanking agaisnt turrets can only be achiebved in VERY close ranges now).
It does more damage to Blasterboats than you think. The MWD reactivation, Deathscram, and Weak webs need to go.
My views and opinions represent my corporation just fine, thanks. |
|
|
|
CCP Atropos
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 11:43:00 -
[531]
Hehe. Fortunately for the EVE player base I have zero input on the ship and module balancing side of things, so quoting my comments from Sisi local is a little silly in all honesty.
I've always been quite outspoken and a little oddball with my setups so using me as a baseline for ship designs is more than likely to get you killed 
With regards to the speed issue, we're aware that these are broad and wide ranging changes, but as we've already said, we are more than willing to listen to the feedback you're all bringing. I said the same thing in Sisi local last night, but you don't see that getting quoted 
All I ask is that you keep the signal to noise ratio down, please. This is a controversial issue for many, but constructive feedback is always welcome, from any player. Some of the posts here have already identified several key issues that we're looking into, and we will continue to do so.
|
|
Jackaryas
Caldari
Trans-Solar Works
FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 11:47:00 -
[532]
I think this nerf is the most sensible nerf i have seen for a long while, because ive fought gangs who use nano sure, but there impossible to kill because they nano around just out of point range, missiles cant hit them turrets cant track them, so by reducing the speed means they can still be used but it means you can actually kill them and their not invulnrable
great job CCP 
|
Jackaryas
Caldari
Trans-Solar Works
FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 11:49:00 -
[533]
Originally by: XxAngelxX
This patch, whilst good for the casual PVPer (NPCs/Mines/Station spins all day until someone comes into their space) is not good for those who need to cover territory quickly to find fights, and not spend hours logged off because they are camped in.
Come back and fight Foundation Angel, you know you'll always get a fight with us 
Last fight was great
|
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 11:50:00 -
[534]
Edited by: Kalintos Tyl on 29/07/2008 11:53:34
Edited by: Kalintos Tyl on 29/07/2008 11:51:19
http://img300.imageshack.us/my.php?image=drake2js3.jpg
post narf what i should train ? :DDDDD
(clue: less sp needed, always hit,can swap for best damage, have more ehp,tanks more, can mwd for longer, weight less,effective vs every ship class,cheaper rigs)
|
The Djego
Minmatar
merovinger inc
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 11:54:00 -
[535]
Originally by: Haakelen
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Originally by: Azilia Nefetti
Only thing i dont really like is the -% to web speed,
its a bit low now.
70-80% would of been reasonable.
naa in fact its pretty good. Go test on the server. Works very well with the idea tha AB shoudl be usefull an AB ship whiel webbed still reach its nominal base speed. While MWD ships if webbed and scrammed are in way worse situation. The 50-60% is key to make AB usefull again (sicne speed tanking agaisnt turrets can only be achiebved in VERY close ranges now).
It does more damage to Blasterboats than you think. The MWD reactivation, Deathscram, and Weak webs need to go.
Ok Blaster ships get slower(takes fare longer to get in Web Range) and if you are in Web Range it is more like gooing into less speed Range and hello to hard to track range. IsnŠt it great, with nerfing fast ships CCP nerf slow ships even more and putting to final nail into the Blaster Coffin. 
Atm there are a couple of possiblilitys atm on sisi.
You donŠt get in Web Range -> you are dead.
You get in Web Range but you are unable to hit because of Tracking vs a AB Ship -> you are dead.
You get in Web Range but you loose most of your DPS against a smaller Ship, webbed without AB -> your dead if itŠs fitted for tank.
You get in Web Range you loose your MWD and you loose most of you DPS to range -> you are dead.
So lots of dieing in Blaster ships in(for real this kills Blaster Ships compleetly) and out of Web Range if the Target has a Scramber, a Web or a AB. Now the big question is, how usefull is a weapon that sucks out of Web Range and now even sucks IN Web Range?
----
Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Amantus
Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
|
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 11:59:00 -
[536]
Welcome to autocanons with reduced damage due to msisses. And lower base damage.
|
The Djego
Minmatar
merovinger inc
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 12:01:00 -
[537]
Originally by: Kalintos Tyl
Welcome to autocanons with reduced damage due to msisses. And lower base damage.
Try a weapon with half of the Falloff and next to the same Optimal, you would be suprised how mutch that sucks.
----
Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Amantus
Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
|
Soyemia
Minmatar
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 12:02:00 -
[538]
WTS: Blaster and autocannons!
No but for real Nozh!! I get 500m/s in an armor rigged BS... How are you planning on gettign to hit somethign with Autocannons or even more so with blasters? Its worse than a friggin' AB with current mechanics. I guess you didnt think that far did you?
You really really have to give a thought what you are proposing. You can simply nerf nanos easily with hurting speed mods, polys and snakes. DO NOT KILL OTHER SHIPS!! Blaster ships were quite well balanced, atleast BS level, but with these changes they will become obsolete. YOu're touching all ships here. You are giving caldari a huge buff, little buff to amarr and killing totally blasters. Minmatar BSs ('cept typhoon) were already bad. Typhoon isnt bad because it doesnt use minmatar weapons 
I guess you dont think the whole picture. In the three years I've played, you're probably proposing the stuidest idea ever. I agree nanos should be nerfed like hell, I do. But you're nerfing so much else at the same time. Stupid Nozh.
Official BoB fanboy. Called Stabemia. Corp hopper. |
Julius Scipio
Amarr
Ad Astra Vexillum
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 12:02:00 -
[539]
I like the idea behind this nerf. Trying to get gangs with multiple ship types instead of the usual 10 nano HACs. The changes to roles within the gang will be interesting, the FC and gang members will have to think a bit more. Perhaps being forced to use interceptor squads, multiple webs in their tacklers, greater use of covops warp ins etc.. It will freshen up the stale tactics of 0.0
Also it can't be right that snaked, boosted, faction BS could go as fast as an Interceptor.
Generally these changes are long overdue, will mean a lot of players will have to think a bit more for a while and hopefully see the end of all those endless nano-*** gangs.
|
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 12:03:00 -
[540]
Originally by: Soyemia
WTS: Blaster and autocannons!
No but for real Nozh!! I get 500m/s in an armor rigged BS... How are you planning on gettign to hit somethign with Autocannons or even more so with blasters? Its worse than a friggin' AB with current mechanics. I guess you didnt think that far did you?
You really really have to give a thought what you are proposing. You can simply nerf nanos easily with hurting speed mods, polys and snakes. DO NOT KILL OTHER SHIPS!! Blaster ships were quite well balanced, atleast BS level, but with these changes they will become obsolete. YOu're touching all ships here. You are giving caldari a huge buff, little buff to amarr and killing totally blasters. Minmatar BSs ('cept typhoon) were already bad. Typhoon isnt bad because it doesnt use minmatar weapons
I guess you dont think the whole picture. In the three years I've played, you're probably proposing the stuidest idea ever. I agree nanos should be nerfed like hell, I do. But you're nerfing so much else at the same time. Stupid Nozh.
you are supoused to train top image http://img300.imageshack.us/my.php?image=drake2js3.jpg and dont worry about tracking,optimal,falloff
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 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 80 .. 88 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |