EVE Search - Plans for black ops?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Plans for black ops?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Sniper Wolf18 Gallente Apocalypse Ponies H E L I C O N	Posted - 2008.11.01 14:42:00 - [1] Do CCP have any plans to give black ops a boost, or are they just gonna sit around unused and unwanted? i mean, ~500m for a t2 battleship is supposed to have some upgrades over its predecessor, not just supposed to sit around and be an unused piece of crap. I see covops flying around, i see Recons flying around, i see stealth bombers flying around (rarely) so why no blackops?
Rexthor Hammerfists Rage of Inferno	Posted - 2008.11.01 14:46:00 - [2] Blackops will get fuel bays, also blockaderunners will be able to ge bridged by them - into cynojammed systems. Blackops will be very viable after the patch. - Boosters and PirateProfessions
RedSplat Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.11.01 15:11:00 - [3] The fact Blackops are 5* more expensive for dubious benefit and insta primaried might have something to do with that.
Bloody Rabbit Jita Miners	Posted - 2008.11.01 17:08:00 - [4] Originally by: RedSplat The fact Blackops are 5* more expensive for dubious benefit and insta primaried might have something to do with that. So what, carriers cost big isk but you still see people using carriers solo. The wussy players who take the game too serious won't use a black op but those players sit in a T1 BS and cry when they lose it so there is no pleasing them.
Azuse Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.11.01 17:15:00 - [5] If your fc is calling targets based on their isk cost, you have much bigger things to be worrying about m8 -------------------------
Guygeboe	Posted - 2008.11.01 17:48:00 - [6] Originally by: Azuse If your fc is calling targets based on their isk cost, you have much bigger things to be worrying about m8 true, but if the falcon on steroids( Widow ) is not primary then I'm worrying about your FC :)
Waxau Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2008.11.01 18:33:00 - [7] Originally by: Guygeboe Originally by: Azuse If your fc is calling targets based on their isk cost, you have much bigger things to be worrying about m8 true, but if the falcon on steroids( Widow ) is not primary then I'm worrying about your FC :) Widow sucks at jamming actually. 8 mid slots, atleast 1 ( i got 2) for a sensor booster, one or two for tank - leaves 4 mids. Cant go racial, cos ya dont want to be stuck with a 'non-racial' for a target...so you go multi's...so you only have a jam range of 50km or so. Hardly anything to worry about, unless you're solo.
Heretic Angel	Posted - 2008.11.01 19:19:00 - [8] Maybe i just try to use my redeemer in the wrong locations, but anytime i see a time to use it, i loadup jumpplanner and find i need like 2 or 3 mid point covert cynos (and this isint trying to go like half the map, im talking maybe 8-10 jumps) and iv got 5-5 skills makes me sad
Lithalnas Amarr Headcrabs	Posted - 2008.11.01 19:26:00 - [9] Anyone remember when blackops were first introduced to sisi? They had a jump range which included the entire galaxy. Oh that would be so fun to have again. ------------- fixed for greater eve content
Rajere No Trademark	Posted - 2008.11.01 19:43:00 - [10] Edited by: Rajere on 01/11/2008 19:44:10 Quote: Widow sucks at jamming actually. 8 mid slots, atleast 1 ( i got 2) for a sensor booster, one or two for tank - leaves 4 mids. Cant go racial, cos ya dont want to be stuck with a 'non-racial' for a target...so you go multi's...so you only have a jam range of 50km or so. Hardly anything to worry about, unless you're solo. Agreed. At Blackops IV, Widow is 5% better than a Griffin for jamming effectiveness. That one useless bonus on the widow is responsible for the majority of the playerbase misunderstanding the entire line of black ops and labeling them as some kind of "support" vessel which lead the playerbase into shoehorning the ships into a function they are not actually capable of performing, except on paper. There are so many other potential roles and uses for blackops where they are clearly more effective and useful, but no one seems willing to try except a small handful of dedicated pvp enthusiasts. -------------------------- NOTR How to Fail at Eve
Mo adib	Posted - 2008.11.01 22:21:00 - [11] to be honest after the patch that gives em a fuel bay and lets the transports use em blackops will be incredibly freaking awesome, even more so when the patch comes that allows covops cynos to work in cyno jammed systems.
Waxau Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2008.11.01 22:51:00 - [12] Originally by: Mo adib to be honest after the patch that gives em a fuel bay and lets the transports use em blackops will be incredibly freaking awesome, even more so when the patch comes that allows covops cynos to work in cyno jammed systems. To be honest, i dont see this. It gives OTHER PEOPLE a reason to train up for it. But for those of us who have been able to fly them since release, and HAVE been flying them...theyre still just as crap. They need attribute changes/bonus changes/role changes in order to be useful. Not just a 'ahh we'll tweak this a bit, and maybe that'.
Celestra Doxaila MinTek Heavy Industries	Posted - 2008.11.02 00:01:00 - [13] Originally by: Sniper Wolf18 I see covops flying around, i see Recons flying around, i see stealth bombers flying around (rarely) so why no blackops? They must not have been doin a good job if you saw them! But seriously, I agree with OP, BlackOps are not designed for actual combat, which makes them a serious niche ship. It would be nice if they could at least use gang links or something to that effect. The idea of them peircing though cynojammers is very nice though, that would certianly boost demand for them.
Katarlia Simov Minmatar Cowboys From Hell	Posted - 2008.11.02 00:42:00 - [14] I think that if black ops had SOMETHING to make them useable to attack cynojammed systems then they would be THE tool of choice for a lot of situations. As it stands, they will take days on end to kill a cyno jammer, and they just don't have the tank for that kind of job. How about a logistics bonus, so that a bundle of them could ACTUALLY spider up and attack pos modules ?
ElCoCo KIA Corp KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.02 01:02:00 - [15] Originally by: Katarlia Simov How about a logistics bonus, so that a bundle of them could ACTUALLY spider up and attack pos modules ? Like a module that would boost say by 600% the DPS of stealth bombers? Boink!
JAFM	Posted - 2008.11.02 01:28:00 - [16] Since Black-Ops are supposed to be the linchpin of "stealth" gangs why not give them the "99% reduction in the CPU need of Warfare Link modules." of Battlecruisers? It's not the buff most people were looking for, but I believe it could really make them interesting in those types of gangs.
Waxau Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2008.11.02 02:03:00 - [17] I hate spamming it wherever i chat about black ops, but seriously- Allowing Cov Ops cloaks would be an instant fix to most of the problems, as it 'reworks' the ships. It doesnt have a scan res penalty with a cov ops cloak, plus a greater survivability. It gives it more stealth, and so on. An ability the weaker dps/tank is WORTHY of.
cianide pro	Posted - 2008.11.02 06:05:00 - [18] Originally by: Waxau I hate spamming it wherever i chat about black ops, but seriously- Allowing Cov Ops cloaks would be an instant fix to most of the problems, as it 'reworks' the ships. It doesnt have a scan res penalty with a cov ops cloak, plus a greater survivability. It gives it more stealth, and so on. An ability the weaker dps/tank is WORTHY of. I agree but if only the scan res penalty would be taken away on coming patch as well then it will be a lot better already and we could see how this would work ingame. A least it will save med slots which we now need for sensor boosters and that gives us a bit more flexibility and it wont boost it directly to uber status, so why not change this?? I dont see any reason.
Solomunio Kzenig Amarr VITOC	Posted - 2008.11.02 08:18:00 - [19] Edited by: Solomunio Kzenig on 02/11/2008 08:21:04
Solomunio Kzenig Amarr VITOC	Posted - 2008.11.02 08:21:00 - [20] Fuel Bay for Black Ops = goodish Ability of Blockade Runners to use Covert Cyno's = better Jump into Cynojammed systems = nice Ability to use Covert Cloak = What the bloody ship should have had from day 1. Come on CCP, give Black Ops some proper luv.
Rajere No Trademark	Posted - 2008.11.02 09:34:00 - [21] Quote: to be honest after the patch that gives em a fuel bay and lets the transports use em blackops will be incredibly freaking awesome, even more so when the patch comes that allows covops cynos to work in cyno jammed systems. Not really. The fuel bay on the blackops is a convenience, it reduces the tedium of maintaining fuel caches. The changes to blockade runners are just that, changes for blockade runners. It gives transport ships new roles and new functionality, the blackops maintains the same functionality it has always had: The ability to open covert jump bridges for ships which can already fit covops cloaks, and therefore don't need bridging to begin with. Grats, it changes nothing for the blackops. While there's a few of us who enjoy the ships now, and have figured out ways to use blackops effectively, the vast majority of the players out there think the ships are horrible and useless. I hate to say it but if you cannot find a way to utilize them now, what is changing that would make you think you'd be able to after the changes? Blockade runners? If the lack of cargo space to haul fuel around was the only thing standing in your way, you'd already be doing it. You'd have 2-3+ cargo expander fitted/rigged pilgrims with your recon gangs, with Cov Ops cloak, Cov Cyno, and Remote Armor Reps in the highs for post battle patch up work. The blockade runner changes would simply make it easier for you to take care of fuel logistics, but if this was going to be a useful function for the ships, we'd already see it being done now with cargo-pilgrims. Honestly the problem again is this idea that blackops are "Support" for a recon gang, and I blame the silly bonus on the Widow for that. Think about it, if you have 2 members in your gang, you are in a Raven and your gangmate is in a blackbird, would anyone assume that the Raven is the support ship for the blackbird gang? Why then is the Widow the support for the Falcon? One is the most effective ECM ship in game, the other does 900 DPS and has over 109k EHP, Hopefully no one is confused about which one is which. How could the Widow "support" the falcon anyway? He will have useful mods in free high slots like Heavy Neuts etc. That covert jump bridge stays in your hangar back at your base, you only dock up and fit it when you need it. The covert jump bridge is merely one of the tools the blackops has, a tertiary ability, not it's main function. It's players trying to shoehorn the blackops into this ninja jump portaling "role" that are having the most problems with the ships being useless. How useful is the ability to open a bridge to a system that's only 2-3 regular jumps away? Oh and only for ships which can easily evade the gate camps/defenders due to their cov ops cloaks? I will agree with Waxau about the Covert Ops cloak. Not for the ability to warp cloaked, could care less about that and I don't see how that will change how blackops are used. You're still a battleship, with all the limitations of a battleship, especially traveling between systems. A frig or cruiser can burn out of a bubble from just his initial burst of the MWD before he cloaked, and once you're out of the bubble you can go ahead and warp cloaked. A battleship? not so much, you're going to be able to move about 500 meters max before you're decloaked by the hostile gang and at that point, GG. I am however, interested in a 0 CPU Cloak (with blackops V similiar to recons I hope) with no scan res penalty. Doesn't even need to let me warp cloaked, but if it does, no big deal. 0 CPU, 0% scan res penalty cloaks would definitely ease some concerns I have with the Redeemer specifically and blackops in general. That, the fuel bay, cyno-jammer systems, and giving them all the Sin's agility bonus and i'd be pretty content with them. -------------------------- NOTR How to Fail at Eve
ElCoCo KIA Corp KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.02 11:48:00 - [22] Edited by: ElCoCo on 02/11/2008 11:49:21 Originally by: Rajere ...and giving them all the Sin's agility bonus and i'd be pretty content with them. What, eh? No, go away! Change that stupid agility bonus to something else. Boink!
Baudolino Gallente Royal Crimson Lancers	Posted - 2008.11.02 13:05:00 - [23] I would like to see two changes to BOs... 1. 300% bonus to cloaked velocity per level 2. Cloaked activation of cyvert cyno gen and covert jump portal. *If recons and BOs could activate covert cyno WHILE cloaked and REMAIN cloaed in entry system- they would be truly awesome "Black Ops" and search and destroy guerilla warfare would take on a whole new dimension..
Katy Karkinoff Minmatar Psycho Chicks	Posted - 2008.11.02 14:40:00 - [24] Originally by: ElCoCo Edited by: ElCoCo on 02/11/2008 11:49:21 Originally by: Rajere ...and giving them all the Sin's agility bonus and i'd be pretty content with them. What, eh? No, go away! Change that stupid agility bonus to something else. i wanna know what they were thinking when they gave it that bonus in the first place... Totally useless.
Rajere No Trademark	Posted - 2008.11.02 17:18:00 - [25] Well since you have 20 kills with a Panther (looking at the other ships you fly ahem machariel, I can guess what you were doign with that panther too, not really related to blackops at all) then you can disagree with the agility bonus replacing the speed bonus the panther currently has (though honestly, after the nano-nerf I'm not sure why you wouldn't want the speed switched to agility), but I know a few sin pilots who would be pretty upset if they took away their agility bonus. Quote: i wanna know what they were thinking when they gave it that bonus in the first place... Totally useless. couldnt' find a killboard for what I assume to be a 1 man alt corp, so post with a main so i can look at your kb for blackops usage. The Sin has the most useful bonus, a bonus the blackops ships actually need, unlike the Redeemer which has tracking and the widow which has ECM strength. The panther's bonus does have it's uses, but it's not related to blackops at all, it's for invisible Nano-machariel capital ship bumpage. That will go away with the nano-nerf, so I'd assume panthers would want a new bonus as well. -------------------------- NOTR How to Fail at Eve
ElCoCo KIA Corp KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.02 19:31:00 - [26] Originally by: Rajere Well since you have 20 kills with a Panther (looking at the other ships you fly ahem machariel, I can guess what you were doign with that panther too, not really related to blackops at all). Well I got it for a real bargain price with polycarbs orelse I wouldn't use it at all duh. My machariel is certainly not nano fitted and I fly and own all (yes all) the battleships ingame with this character alone. But ofcourse you got me and my playstyle figured out All i can say is that I've tried and realy realy tested all the blackops and opted not to realy bother with them and hey, besides all BS's lvl5 I got blackops 5 as well! Now I'm staring at my widow and all those officer multispecs I bought before they had the blackops details down and I'm scratching my head On the sin's agility bonus ermm... I dunno how you use your sin in your fail 1man and his alt gangs, but honestly? (see, I guessed how you play as well!) Boink!
Samarath SIEGE.	Posted - 2008.12.04 17:06:00 - [27] And there I was lookin forward to hopin in a Sin...I didn't know you couldn't fit the cov op cloak on the black ops. Kinda lame imo. Guess I should read a bit closer before I go trainin jump drive op 5 and such...lol
Black Night	Posted - 2008.12.04 18:02:00 - [28] The one thing I think a BlackOps ship should be able to do, is jump behind enemy lines, create havoc, and then be able to jump back out. Basically be able to self jump without someone opening a Cyno gate on the other side.
Thea Arsoniztik Red Tides Viewer Discretion Advised	Posted - 2008.12.04 18:13:00 - [29] Originally by: Samarath And there I was lookin forward to hopin in a Sin...I didn't know you couldn't fit the cov op cloak on the black ops. Kinda lame imo. Guess I should read a bit closer before I go trainin jump drive op 5 and such...lol I'd like to see a covert ops cloak on them too. That would convince me to actually use them. I can see why it could be imbalanced, though. As it is now, I don't see what the point of them is if you can covertly cyno in a black ops, but then risk the enemy seeing your ship on scan anyway once you warp.
NeoTheo Dark Materials	Posted - 2008.12.04 18:25:00 - [30] Edited by: NeoTheo on 04/12/2008 18:26:37 why the heck put tank on a widow? 2x sensor boosters, and rest jammers. at least for skirmish warfare, blobs is a different matter, but if your blobbing you should be in a falcon / scorp (if you really must fly a BS) anyhow. tbh the falcon is the way to go for fleets. i personally dont like the idea of the covert ops cloak on them, its almost as stupid as suggesting they belong on bombers as well. i would like the scan res penaltie removed from them for fitting a cloak however, it adds around 4 seconds to locking another BS. - DAMT - If you dont know, well, you dont know!
Thea Arsoniztik Red Tides Viewer Discretion Advised	Posted - 2008.12.04 18:31:00 - [31] Originally by: NeoTheo Edited by: NeoTheo on 04/12/2008 18:26:37 i would like the scan res penaltie removed from them for fitting a cloak however, it adds around 4 seconds to locking another BS. Fair enough, I guess.
Nian Banks Minmatar Berserkers of Aesir	Posted - 2008.12.04 19:05:00 - [32] Originally by: Black Night The one thing I think a BlackOps ship should be able to do, is jump behind enemy lines, create havoc, and then be able to jump back out. Basically be able to self jump without someone opening a Cyno gate on the other side. This is the perfect fix for a black ops, if you could jump into a system at a random coordinate. Then the black ops battleship would do what it was designed for. Getting a small fleet behind enemy lines without any warning. And having to get a cov ops into the system first to make the cyno is one way of tipping off the enemy. Without the need of a cyno, there would be no warning what so ever.
Waxau Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2008.12.04 19:22:00 - [33] Originally by: NeoTheo Edited by: NeoTheo on 04/12/2008 18:26:37 why the heck put tank on a widow? 2x sensor boosters, and rest jammers. at least for skirmish warfare, blobs is a different matter, but if your blobbing you should be in a falcon / scorp (if you really must fly a BS) anyhow. tbh the falcon is the way to go for fleets. i personally dont like the idea of the covert ops cloak on them, its almost as stupid as suggesting they belong on bombers as well. i would like the scan res penaltie removed from them for fitting a cloak however, it adds around 4 seconds to locking another BS. Sounds like you've never flown a black ops. As such, i wont reply to your post with a in defence of the tank.
NeoTheo Dark Materials	Posted - 2008.12.04 19:27:00 - [34] Edited by: NeoTheo on 04/12/2008 19:34:51 Originally by: Waxau Sounds like you've never flown a black ops. As such, i wont reply to your post with a in defence of the tank. hehe, no offence wax, your entitled to your opinion but most of your posts come across as "i wanna solo pwn mobile", when it comes to black ops. (maybe thats not fair, but ok drop pwn and say "solo"). same mentality as a scorp in my opinion, and i rarely put a tank on one of them as well. (and to answer your question, only on sisi - to any extent). - DAMT - If you dont know, well, you dont know!
Waxau Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2008.12.04 19:44:00 - [35] Not a solo-pwn mobile at all tbh mate. I think theyre good as solo ships atm. Its their overall functions and abilities that need a boost. Lock time for example. Im truly not fussed about them being boosted into pwnmobiles tho...but for 500 mil, i dont want to fly a ship, that tends to only be useful in one or two scenarios, that are rare at the best of times. Ive now sold my Widow, and gone amarr. Ive bought a LG slave set with the cash too. Once i have the skills up for t2 large, ill get a Redeemer, mainly cos its of more use to a pirate, than a Widow. But even then, i know from others that the redeemer has just the same use and potential as a geddon. Plus 500 mil extra in cost.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2008.12.04 20:09:00 - [36] Edited by: Bronson Hughes on 04/12/2008 20:10:11 Judging from CCP's sense of 'balance', I seriously doubt that the Black Ops BS will become CovOps Cloak capable unless the Stealth Bomber line does as well. And we all know how likely that is to happen.... Right now, they're very handy niche ships. Hot-dropping Recons and Stealth Bombers on nearby fights or unsuspecting 0.0 carebears, bypassing gatecamps (to a degree, you still have ot get one ship through), and putting on funky light shows. They're somewhat useful in direct combat, but not nearly as useful as a ship that expensive and hard to train for should be. The big problem with Black Ops from my experience (not flying, but operating with) is that they're somewhat of a hodge-podge of ships in terms of bonuses; there's little consistency between the 4 ships and even the bonuses on some of the single ships don't make much sense when combined with the others. The Widow is like the bastard child of a Rook and a Manticore on steriods. The Sin and the Panther both have seemingly useless movement bonuses in addition to the cloak-related one. The Sin only has 4 turret hardpoints. Only the Redeemer seems to have self-consistent bonuses that are all oriented towards the same purpose (i.e. heavy laser fire) and the hardpoints/slot layout to use them well. What I think is necessary to really fix the Black Ops line is simply the following: give them a distinct purpose and the bonuses/slots/harpoints to accomodate that purpose. Are they supposed to be more like big recon ships or big stealth bombers? I'm leaning more towards the latter which means using the Redeemer as a model for the other three: 6 weapon hardpoints (5 for the Sin due to drone capability), and three bonuses focused on the primary weapon system of the ship. The other things that people ask for; a fuel bay, longer jump range, reduced jump cost, etc., would be nice but before anything else I think that the combat role of the Black Ops needs to be sorted out first. Thoughts? EDIT: I also think you should be able to put up Covert Cynos in Cynojammed systems, but that's a technically Covert Cyno topic, not a Black Ops topic. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Rajere No Trademark Notoriety Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.06 19:09:00 - [37] Quote: i know from others that the redeemer has just the same use and potential as a geddon. Plus 500 mil extra in cost. The people you know are ******s then. Like all blackops there use is very different than a t1 bs. You would never use a blackops when you could use a t1 bs instead. You use blackops when you can't use t1 bs, or carriers, or anything else. Blackops have a well thought out role currently and they are amazing ships in that role. They are less good in other roles. -------------------------- NOTR
Captator Universal Securities Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2008.12.06 19:26:00 - [38] Originally by: Rajere Quote: i know from others that the redeemer has just the same use and potential as a geddon. Plus 500 mil extra in cost. The people you know are ******s then. Like all blackops there use is very different than a t1 bs. You would never use a blackops when you could use a t1 bs instead. You use blackops when you can't use t1 bs, or carriers, or anything else. Blackops have a well thought out role currently and they are amazing ships in that role. They are less good in other roles. Just curious Rajere, why do you think the widow is worst for the role in which you use blackops?
Carniflex Caldari StarHunt Fallout Project	Posted - 2008.12.06 19:56:00 - [39] Originally by: Captator Originally by: Rajere Quote: i know from others that the redeemer has just the same use and potential as a geddon. Plus 500 mil extra in cost. The people you know are ******s then. Like all blackops there use is very different than a t1 bs. You would never use a blackops when you could use a t1 bs instead. You use blackops when you can't use t1 bs, or carriers, or anything else. Blackops have a well thought out role currently and they are amazing ships in that role. They are less good in other roles. Just curious Rajere, why do you think the widow is worst for the role in which you use blackops? Bcos it has lowest amount of low slots for cargo expanders ? After all it's jump portal generator is it's unique ability. Everything else some other platform can do cheaper and/or better.
Captator Universal Securities Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2008.12.06 20:11:00 - [40] Originally by: Carniflex Bcos it has lowest amount of low slots for cargo expanders ? After all it's jump portal generator is it's unique ability. Everything else some other platform can do cheaper and/or better. That isn't how they use their blackops
Megumi Yumiko	Posted - 2008.12.07 02:11:00 - [41] Edited by: Megumi Yumiko on 07/12/2008 02:11:41 I was asking this 150 days ago before i started training for it haha But it needs some extra stuff as it not bad however its getting hold back ... and a normal domi can pop it ^^
cianide pro	Posted - 2008.12.07 06:08:00 - [42] Plans for black ops? The more I think of it there ''could'' be use for them in the march upgrade, wormholes, finding and transporting t3 components back with a cov ops haulers jump port generating black ops combo.
viiip3r Amarr Electronic Tactical	Posted - 2008.12.31 14:57:00 - [43] Whats with the TECH II ship? can not fit a TECH II Cloak ? ship CPU =505 for REDEEMER Tech II Clock = 10,000 CPU no cpu reduction for tech II clock on a ship that is suppose to be BLACK OPS ? To the Scrap yard (junk yard). The Lords
Waxau Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2008.12.31 15:23:00 - [44] Originally by: viiip3r Whats with the TECH II ship? can not fit a TECH II Cloak ? ship CPU =505 for REDEEMER Tech II Clock = 10,000 CPU no cpu reduction for tech II clock on a ship that is suppose to be BLACK OPS ? To the Scrap yard (junk yard). ...Eh?
viiip3r Amarr Electronic Tactical	Posted - 2008.12.31 15:31:00 - [45] Eh? Read the specs !!! Tech II Redeemer Black ops CPU 505 One role, clocked, not possible #Tech II clock CPU=10,000 I'm I missing something? it was nerf, previously the Redeemer all black-ops had a cpu reduction for Cloaks, it's gone. The Lords
Magunus The Forsakened Few	Posted - 2008.12.31 15:38:00 - [46] 10 second delay per black ops level to showing up in local for every ship using the covert jump portal. --- In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -- Douglas Adams, 'The Restaurant at the End of the Universe'
ElCoCo KIA Corp KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.31 15:38:00 - [47] Originally by: viiip3r it was nerf, previously the Redeemer all black-ops had a cpu reduction for Cloaks, it's gone. nope, never. Boink!
Waxau Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2008.12.31 15:45:00 - [48] Originally by: viiip3r Eh? Read the specs !!! Tech II Redeemer Black ops CPU 505 One role, clocked, not possible #Tech II clock CPU=10,000 I'm I missing something? it was nerf, previously the Redeemer all black-ops had a cpu reduction for Cloaks, it's gone. I'll repeat.. ........Eh? What stats you looking at boy
viiip3r Amarr Electronic Tactical	Posted - 2008.12.31 15:57:00 - [49] Looking at the wrong stats.... For Covert ops cloak, not improved cloak The Lords

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.