| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gan Howorth
   |
Posted - 2004.07.28 22:49:00 -
[1]
Well for those of you who haven't seen the post by TomB on increasing power grid on ships and modules to force a delineated use of modules and ship classes. Its here in Patch review:
oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=97763
For some reason unknown to me, no opinions on this idea have been allowed to remain visible. This thread is not browseable except with a direct URL
Do not link to deleted threads. They're deleted for a reason. - Orestes
You can post on it but no-one will see it unless they navigate to it from a "Joke" thread in Eve Forum Experiments. I presume we are allowed to discuss the idea out in the open in General Discussions however, so l have posted here.
*******************************
Here is my post on it: (and no its not a cross post because its not visible in any other browseable thread  )
There have been many big changes to this game. When others were losing their minds over them, l was quite happy to wait and see because l have entirely agreed with the principles behind the changes. Not this one buddy!
Why are we doing this? One reason: because missile based interceptors cant be hit by a proletarian loadout using a 10mn AB. That's it, nothing else..nada...
Proles with no imagination to fit any number of countermeasures to this "invulnerable"  threat. Hmm..smartbombs, webbers, nosferatus/neutralisers, drones off the top of my head. I fit my BS and cruisers with anti-ceptor loadouts specifically in mind. This so called problem is actually a part of my enjoyment of the game as l figure out ways to surprise the enemy...
Do not lose the grey area between ship classes its one of the magical things this game allows the skilled and imaginative to do. In fact you should try to make the grey area even greyer but nevermind.
Solution:
Dump the MWD entirely from the game.
Convert MWD affecting skills to become AB affecting skills with a buff where deemed necessary.
Up the speed boost of AB's.
Create new classes of AB as already suggested.
Messing with PG to address this ONE problem (and it is just the one ceptor with 10mn AB problem isnt it, cos it doesnt address the stacked MWD problem) is entirely unwise to say the least.
Look, you've made me rant! 
|
Gan Howorth
|
Posted - 2004.07.28 22:49:00 -
[2]
Well for those of you who haven't seen the post by TomB on increasing power grid on ships and modules to force a delineated use of modules and ship classes. Its here in Patch review:
oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=97763
For some reason unknown to me, no opinions on this idea have been allowed to remain visible. This thread is not browseable except with a direct URL
Do not link to deleted threads. They're deleted for a reason. - Orestes
You can post on it but no-one will see it unless they navigate to it from a "Joke" thread in Eve Forum Experiments. I presume we are allowed to discuss the idea out in the open in General Discussions however, so l have posted here.
*******************************
Here is my post on it: (and no its not a cross post because its not visible in any other browseable thread )
There have been many big changes to this game. When others were losing their minds over them, l was quite happy to wait and see because l have entirely agreed with the principles behind the changes. Not this one buddy!
Why are we doing this? One reason: because missile based interceptors cant be hit by a proletarian loadout using a 10mn AB. That's it, nothing else..nada...
Proles with no imagination to fit any number of countermeasures to this "invulnerable" threat. Hmm..smartbombs, webbers, nosferatus/neutralisers, drones off the top of my head. I fit my BS and cruisers with anti-ceptor loadouts specifically in mind. This so called problem is actually a part of my enjoyment of the game as l figure out ways to surprise the enemy...
Do not lose the grey area between ship classes its one of the magical things this game allows the skilled and imaginative to do. In fact you should try to make the grey area even greyer but nevermind.
Solution:
Dump the MWD entirely from the game.
Convert MWD affecting skills to become AB affecting skills with a buff where deemed necessary.
Up the speed boost of AB's.
Create new classes of AB as already suggested.
Messing with PG to address this ONE problem (and it is just the one ceptor with 10mn AB problem isnt it, cos it doesnt address the stacked MWD problem) is entirely unwise to say the least.
Look, you've made me rant!
|
Lusiphur
|
Posted - 2004.07.28 22:58:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Lusiphur on 28/07/2004 23:01:03
I wondered what happened to that threat in Ships and Modules
I had posted on it and my comments still stand. However I have now taken the chance to 'archive' my comment and so can re-state the argument whenever I like 
At the end of the day, this still seams like taking a sledgehammer to ***** a nut.
EDIT : WTF .. the filter doesn't like the word c.r.a.c.k used in a non sexual context ?
|
Lusiphur
|
Posted - 2004.07.28 22:58:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Lusiphur on 28/07/2004 23:01:03
I wondered what happened to that threat in Ships and Modules
I had posted on it and my comments still stand. However I have now taken the chance to 'archive' my comment and so can re-state the argument whenever I like
At the end of the day, this still seams like taking a sledgehammer to ***** a nut.
EDIT : WTF .. the filter doesn't like the word c.r.a.c.k used in a non sexual context ?
|
Da3sd3mona
|
Posted - 2004.07.28 23:12:00 -
[5]
I think I have something stuck between my teeth, can you pass me the blowtorch?
-----------------------------------
"Political Correctness, the illegitimate step-child of liberalism, is cultlike in its establishment of correct speech. This is what cults do...they prohibit certain words and discussion of certain topics."
|
Da3sd3mona
|
Posted - 2004.07.28 23:12:00 -
[6]
I think I have something stuck between my teeth, can you pass me the blowtorch?
-----------------------------------
"Political Correctness, the illegitimate step-child of liberalism, is cultlike in its establishment of correct speech. This is what cults do...they prohibit certain words and discussion of certain topics."
|
XeQtR
|
Posted - 2004.07.28 23:39:00 -
[7]
EXACTLY what the poster above said.
CCP: How about NOT using nuclear weapons every single time you discover a slight inbalance? It Is getting SLIGHTLY annoying having to adapt to a completelly new game everytime someone at your office hits the "panic" button.
|
XeQtR
|
Posted - 2004.07.28 23:39:00 -
[8]
EXACTLY what the poster above said.
CCP: How about NOT using nuclear weapons every single time you discover a slight inbalance? It Is getting SLIGHTLY annoying having to adapt to a completelly new game everytime someone at your office hits the "panic" button.
|
Scoobee
|
Posted - 2004.07.28 23:50:00 -
[9]
Tomb...............are you serious? Like are you serious?
Wow... You are going to change around all the powergrid requirements because some people used some oversized modules on their ships? Yeah as the last 2 posters said. Its so overkill its stupid...I'm in aw. How about just restricing modules to the ships they were intended for. So if someone trys to put a 100mw AB on a cruiser it will just say "this module is to large for your ship and will not fit into the module slot" A little easier and less kick in the face for the players don't you think? |
Scoobee
|
Posted - 2004.07.28 23:50:00 -
[10]
Tomb...............are you serious? Like are you serious?
Wow... You are going to change around all the powergrid requirements because some people used some oversized modules on their ships? Yeah as the last 2 posters said. Its so overkill its stupid...I'm in aw. How about just restricing modules to the ships they were intended for. So if someone trys to put a 100mw AB on a cruiser it will just say "this module is to large for your ship and will not fit into the module slot" A little easier and less kick in the face for the players don't you think? |
Tal' asir
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 00:17:00 -
[11]
Scoobee hit it right on the nailhead. Especially when the module's description states:
This is a (x) module.
x stating frigate, cruiser, or battleship.
|
Tal' asir
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 00:17:00 -
[12]
Scoobee hit it right on the nailhead. Especially when the module's description states:
This is a (x) module.
x stating frigate, cruiser, or battleship.
|
sutty
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 00:18:00 -
[13]
I agree, dont up power grid usage etc, just dont allow them to fit to a ship. Makes sense in a RP fashion to.
|
sutty
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 00:18:00 -
[14]
I agree, dont up power grid usage etc, just dont allow them to fit to a ship. Makes sense in a RP fashion to.
|
qtip
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 00:41:00 -
[15]
i dont get it. they up the PG on BSs, because some pilots use those BS-class modules on cruisers, while those modules (ABs) noone really uses on BSs because they are useless? err sure, go ahead..
|
qtip
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 00:41:00 -
[16]
i dont get it. they up the PG on BSs, because some pilots use those BS-class modules on cruisers, while those modules (ABs) noone really uses on BSs because they are useless? err sure, go ahead..
|
Ris Dnalor
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 00:52:00 -
[17]
b/c the modules were made so that they could only be used on one ship. We've found a loopohole & made it work otherwise. CCP is now correcting their mis-step. I think it makes sense myself.
tralala
--
Jump Drive Operation / Rank 5 / SP: 1280000 of 1280000
|
Ris Dnalor
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 00:52:00 -
[18]
b/c the modules were made so that they could only be used on one ship. We've found a loopohole & made it work otherwise. CCP is now correcting their mis-step. I think it makes sense myself.
tralala
--
Jump Drive Operation / Rank 5 / SP: 1280000 of 1280000
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:10:00 -
[19]
So?
In this kind of situation, the players are right.
Same idea as well call Battleships BS, at least in Eve. That still gives me pause because I work so much with Starfire (in which BC = Battlecruiser and BB = Battleship)
"As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade" |
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:10:00 -
[20]
So?
In this kind of situation, the players are right.
Same idea as well call Battleships BS, at least in Eve. That still gives me pause because I work so much with Starfire (in which BC = Battlecruiser and BB = Battleship)
"As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade" |
Vodalus
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:22:00 -
[21]
 Originally by: Ris Dnalor
b/c the modules were made so that they could only be used on one ship. We've found a loopohole & made it work otherwise. CCP is now correcting their mis-step. I think it makes sense myself.
tralala
end yourself please
--------------------------------------------------------------
Originally by: Oveur
EVE is primarily a PVP game
|
Vodalus
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:22:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Ris Dnalor
b/c the modules were made so that they could only be used on one ship. We've found a loopohole & made it work otherwise. CCP is now correcting their mis-step. I think it makes sense myself.
tralala
end yourself please
--------------------------------------------------------------
Originally by: Oveur
EVE is primarily a PVP game
|
Scoobee
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:26:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Vodalus
Originally by: Ris Dnalor
b/c the modules were made so that they could only be used on one ship. We've found a loopohole & made it work otherwise. CCP is now correcting their mis-step. I think it makes sense myself.
tralala
end yourself please
seconded...
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
Yeah well you are about to not have a mouth, I mean it, I'll rip it off!
|
Scoobee
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:26:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Vodalus
Originally by: Ris Dnalor
b/c the modules were made so that they could only be used on one ship. We've found a loopohole & made it work otherwise. CCP is now correcting their mis-step. I think it makes sense myself.
tralala
end yourself please
seconded...
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
Yeah well you are about to not have a mouth, I mean it, I'll rip it off!
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:42:00 -
[25]
If this change goes through I'm ending my account. The things CCP should be focusing on are making 1mn afterburners useful for dogfighting, 1mn mwds useful for approaching and tacking. Which is why the missile changes are good, everything else = bad. Nerfs = bad. TomB's crazy ideas = Bad.
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:42:00 -
[26]
If this change goes through I'm ending my account. The things CCP should be focusing on are making 1mn afterburners useful for dogfighting, 1mn mwds useful for approaching and tacking. Which is why the missile changes are good, everything else = bad. Nerfs = bad. TomB's crazy ideas = Bad.
|
Mikelangelo
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:44:00 -
[27]
This is like going fishing with nuclear weapons.
So to fix 2 so-called imbalances (cruisers and frigates mounting oversized ABs), you introduce a crapload of changes which will lead to even MORE imbalances.
I don't really get it. Class specific AB's were introduced with Castor. You are telling me nobody on the internal testing team even THOUGHT of putting a 100 MN AB on a cruiser and taking it out for a spin?
The whole thing smells of poor testing, poor product quality, poor design and even poorer management.
Pathetic.
|
Mikelangelo
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:44:00 -
[28]
This is like going fishing with nuclear weapons.
So to fix 2 so-called imbalances (cruisers and frigates mounting oversized ABs), you introduce a crapload of changes which will lead to even MORE imbalances.
I don't really get it. Class specific AB's were introduced with Castor. You are telling me nobody on the internal testing team even THOUGHT of putting a 100 MN AB on a cruiser and taking it out for a spin?
The whole thing smells of poor testing, poor product quality, poor design and even poorer management.
Pathetic.
|
Scoobee
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:44:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Selim
If this change goes through I'm ending my account. The things CCP should be focusing on are making 1mn afterburners useful for dogfighting, 1mn mwds useful for approaching and tacking. Which is why the missile changes are good, everything else = bad. Nerfs = bad. TomB's crazy ideas = Bad.
seconded...
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
Yeah well you are about to not have a mouth, I mean it, I'll rip it off!
|
Scoobee
|
Posted - 2004.07.29 01:44:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Selim
If this change goes through I'm ending my account. The things CCP should be focusing on are making 1mn afterburners useful for dogfighting, 1mn mwds useful for approaching and tacking. Which is why the missile changes are good, everything else = bad. Nerfs = bad. TomB's crazy ideas = Bad.
seconded...
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
Yeah well you are about to not have a mouth, I mean it, I'll rip it off!
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |