| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
FC2SW
The Plexus Syndicate
   |
Posted - 2008.08.09 03:37:00 -
[151]
Sounds very good. Would not totally break speed and change about a hundred other game mechanics.
|
Violet Daubert
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 03:39:00 -
[152]
I might be a new character, but this is a good idea.
|
Sempaia Tenda
A.N.A.R.C.H.I.C.A
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 04:06:00 -
[153]
i like this idea
|
Sylthi
Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 04:38:00 -
[154]
All truth has been spoken by the op. This is simple. Elegant. Effective. (Most) Everyone can live with it. It won't destroy the game. CCP will never listen and ram-rod full-steam ahead into nerf-oblivion. All checked.
Therefore this gets my seal of approval!
Check.
*
* |
WishBlade
League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 07:30:00 -
[155]
/+1
Not really an MWD user here, but even I don't agree with their complete oblirteration by CCP's ideas.
Not just for the AB boost I support this.
Aweseomenessness |
Sentille
Minmatar Mafia
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 09:56:00 -
[156]
Once again Sarmaul comes through.
As a Vaga pilot I totally support this. God forbid a fight should require more thought than "Orbit" F1,F2 F3 etc.
|
Red Thunder
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 10:44:00 -
[157]
/against
this still kills most of the other hacs
Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines |
Rastadeen
The Illuminati.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 14:30:00 -
[158]
Wow something that actually makes sense..
|
Deschenus Maximus
The Grim Reapers
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 15:46:00 -
[159]
Yes
The Grim Reapers [GREAP] open for business |
The Economist
Logically Consistent
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 16:01:00 -
[160]
eugh
CSM: This so called council got elected by 5.7% of the player base! (12678 votes)
Who the hell are they going to represent??? |
|
|
Six Strangelove
Minmatar
Quam Singulari
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 18:27:00 -
[161]
 Originally by: Red Thunder
this still forces the other hacs back into their original role
Fixed your post.
----
|
zenthral staichon
Conisor Excavations Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 19:24:00 -
[162]
It of course needs more thought and perhaps some tinkering but I agree with the overall concept. Supported!
|
Drakolus
Dopehead Industries
FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 20:25:00 -
[163]
I like it. The only thing that comes to mind is maybe some mitigation of the fitting on AB's/MWD's.
If you use the MWD to close and still want/need an AB for effective fighting, the 25% "where'd my cap go" from the MWD along with the fitting requirements of a decent AB are going to be a bit steep.
Remove the 25% capacitor nerf?
"adjust" the fitting requirements of MWD's and AB's (maybe they give a sympathetic fitting reduction to each other when fitted to the same ship? But obviously cannot be used at the same time)
*Scripting a single module may be a better/more elegant solution though. AB/MWD script or something.
_____________________________________________
|
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 20:40:00 -
[164]
Originally by: Drakolus
I like it. The only thing that comes to mind is maybe some mitigation of the fitting on AB's/MWD's.
If you use the MWD to close and still want/need an AB for effective fighting, the 25% "where'd my cap go" from the MWD along with the fitting requirements of a decent AB are going to be a bit steep.
Remove the 25% capacitor nerf?
"adjust" the fitting requirements of MWD's and AB's (maybe they give a sympathetic fitting reduction to each other when fitted to the same ship? But obviously cannot be used at the same time)
*Scripting a single module may be a better/more elegant solution though. AB/MWD script or something.
Marvelous.
As was pointed out to me rather well though, fitting two speed modules like that will be hard on most ships, and make for huge trouble with Interceptors. Thus, it might be better to keep the cap penalty and a high energy cost, and not make ABs stack, instead making the Microwarp simply less powerful than it is now? 200-250% speed increase, perhaps?
|
aUTOKILL
H A V O C
The Requiem
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 21:33:00 -
[165]
awesome idea, way way better than ccp's idea. change a few mods instead of all the ones they are doing. less coding and would be altogether better
~~~~~~
doin it for the stats
|
bellevegasj
AnTi.
Atrocitas
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 22:07:00 -
[166]
/signed.
|
Markas Crais
House of Dying Laggers
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 22:34:00 -
[167]
Seems much more reasonable and a better compromise over the current SiSi changes.
|
Rek Esket
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 23:17:00 -
[168]
I approve as well, a nicely thought out change.
_________________________________________________
I usually fly an interceptor so I keep a small signature. |
Krullz
CyberDyne Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 23:57:00 -
[169]
Very Good IDea
|
SnoW BlinDeR
|
Posted - 2008.08.10 00:00:00 -
[170]
signed/
|
|
|
Dapanman1
Beets and Gravy Syndicate
The InterBus Initiative
|
Posted - 2008.08.10 03:28:00 -
[171]
Seriously CCP, why would you rather implement your rediculous changes and subsequently rebalance nearly the entire game (Tracking, Exp Velocity, etc), taking a lot more time than you would by little tweaks here and there. Time that would be better spent looking at real issues, like sov warfare or... I dunno, lag?
Sig removed for inappropriate content.~~~Applebabe |
Chienka
Victory Not Vengeance
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2008.08.10 04:32:00 -
[172]
Edited by: Chienka on 10/08/2008 04:32:26
+1 for this idea.
|
Fhaz
|
Posted - 2008.08.10 05:50:00 -
[173]
I think this is a viable alternative to revamping the game.
Specialy since CCP still hasn't repaired the damage to the arazu and lachesis with their last big nerf.
|
Sirokko
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2008.08.10 06:06:00 -
[174]
This seems like a reasonable idea that would be interesting to test out on sisi.
I still think the web nerf/scram boost is a nifty idea as well though, and could add more interesting combat mechanics.
|
RuleoftheBone
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.08.10 13:22:00 -
[175]
Elegant and simple. Good alternative to current CCP proposed changes.
Supported.
"Lead Me..Follow Me..Or get the **** out of my way"
General George Patton USA
|
Xeno Xandovar
Nebula Rasa Holdings
Nebula Rasa
|
Posted - 2008.08.10 13:29:00 -
[176]
+1 to Sarmaul.
|
Serendipitously
Conisor Excavations Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.08.10 13:35:00 -
[177]
Makes sence to shut down weapon systems before turning on your micro WARP drive. Supported.
|
Lief Siddhe
Siddhe Deliveries
|
Posted - 2008.08.10 14:18:00 -
[178]
Edited by: Lief Siddhe on 10/08/2008 14:18:55
Wow, simple and elegant.
---
Beneath all of our differences there's a single bond between every living Gallentean that makes us hard as diamond: a love of freedom. |
Jordan Musgrat
H A V O C
The Requiem
|
Posted - 2008.08.10 15:33:00 -
[179]
Edited by: Jordan Musgrat on 10/08/2008 15:33:36
Supported, the main thing that would need balancing is how much of a boost ABs get.
If they simply got a 50% boost around the board I'd be happy I think, because then it's still possible to do 1k in a completely tanked out HAC, which basically combines normal tanking with somewhat of a speed tank; you've got your normal sig, BS sized turrets/missiles have a hard time tracking/hitting a tanked target orbiting at 1-1.5k, you are just as vulnerable to neuting, and you get that 25% cap that you've been playing without for years now. No you can't make it back to a gate, so it's not for solo, but in actual 30 man nano gangs, it gives HACs some sort of survivability, brings them back to their gank'n'tank roots, while also opening up many new possibilities, for both the nano gang and those killing it.
-----------
Primary is family values, secondary is 0.0... |
Janek Dax
|
Posted - 2008.08.10 15:38:00 -
[180]
It's a lot simpler and easier to assess than CCP's far reaching proposals, whilst there will always be "issues" regarding any nerf, this seems to reduce the number of possible gripes, worth a test and I support this alternate solution 
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |