Pages: [1] 2 3 4 |
1. Sticky:AFK CloakingGäó: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Lucas Kell wrote: The worry I have whenever changes are proposed is that most of them result in "if in doubt, aggressor wins" which should never be the case as it means that no matter what the defender does, if the aggressor is good enough, he ...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.18 05:54:41
|
2. Sticky:AFK CloakingGäó: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Lucas Kell wrote: You're right, they have mentioned it, but that doesn't mean a change will occur. True. Finding anything that's a significant improvement over the current system is hard, and if they just wanted 'local, but on a structure' it...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.16 14:57:07
|
3. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance Part 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Anyone not actually in the defender's corp/alliance always counts as an attacker for the purposes of entosis links. You can bring in blues/alts to shoot people, but the links must be run by actual members of the defending group. In most cases, mu...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.16 11:33:46
|
4. Why are we not making clones? - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Basic game mechanics should never rely on players to function. You need to be able to go out and die without needing players to be making you clones. It would add massive 'make work' into the game just for people to be able...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.15 13:46:01
|
5. Sticky:AFK CloakingGäó: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Lucas Kell wrote: At the end of the day, I very much doubt CCP will nuke local in null. If it goes it will be replaced with the exact same thing but as a module or a structure, and much like clones they will just be something everyone does and ...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.15 12:47:40
|
6. Make all vanity items consumable - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
'Consumable' may have been an unfortunate choice of words, given EVE's attitude towards item destruction. I'm pretty sure what OP is suggesting is that vanity items become bind-on-equip , not that they be lost if you get podded. No-one would eve...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.14 10:42:44
|
7. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance Part 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Soleil Fournier wrote: I think ship choice should matter in the sov system. Fozzie doesn't want to limit entosis links to a particular shiptype, so lets roll with that but make a change that would still add benefit to choosing different fleet t...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.13 12:42:57
|
8. Standardize the m3 volume for fitted ships - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote: Ivarr Kerensky wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: They are intentionally non homogenous. Just because it's intended doesn't mean it makes sense, is balanced or shouldn't be up for debate. It's a bit silly ...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.13 01:31:05
|
9. Why are we not making clones? - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Tzar Sinak wrote: But wait! What do we make clones out of? 86 Noxcium for a grade Beta clone, 133 Noxcium for a grade Gamma. Blueprints for the others don't exist in the database. (In order to actually contribute something useful to the d...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.11 10:33:27
|
10. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance Part 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Alavaria Fera wrote: d0cTeR9 wrote: snip Yeah. We can't keep mobile fleets up for months indefinitely But Moa can. ... our 0.0 nightmare will be ended by such people huh Not like we can sustain larger numbers always simply because we'r...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.11 10:22:28
|
11. Let us play eve offline! - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: That's bad. There's no way it can possibly be exploited in the game proper. I'd say that puts it above average for F&I...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.10 11:15:57
|
12. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance Part 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Nolak Ataru wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: And? If you want to push that much into a system/constellation you should win, and obviously you care about that location. You are trying to argue that superior numbers of heavy fleets shouldn't win. T...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.09 14:41:11
|
13. [suggestion] Carriers POS Mode - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
The whole point of removing POS shields is that CCP wants to rip out the code behind them, burn it, and scatter the ashes at a crossroads so it can never come back. Given that, I highly doubt that they will be interested in adding POS shields to ...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.07 14:49:09
|
14. Sticky:[New structures] Market hubs and drilling platforms - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote: Bubbleup Now wrote: One area of concern is how the conquering mechanic will work with these structures in Empire space or Wormhole space where the 'constellations' are not as easily demarcated. Many of the emp...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.07 06:12:04
|
15. Miners need some love - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Korvus Falek wrote: baltec1 wrote: We don't need more isk being injected by an army of AFK skiffs. Want minerals to be worth more? reduce the flow of them. Best way to do this? Support ganking. Skiffs dont directly inject ISK into the ma...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.05 14:02:26
|
16. Sticky:[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance Part 2 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Thane Ansollare wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Goal #3: Minimize the systemic pressure to bring more people or larger ships than would be required to simply defeat your enemies on the field of battle. Except if you defeat your enemies on the fi...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.05 13:56:36
|
17. Information - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Not to mention sucking the life out of secondary market hubs.
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.05 12:41:21
|
18. Miners need some love - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
There's no way to increase mining income across-the-board without causing major ripples in the rest of the game: mining's just too big a part of EVE's economy for that. The 'ore subvention' would create a massive new ISK faucet - quite possibly...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.04.05 11:20:35
|
19. Sticky:[New structures] Observatory Arrays and Gates - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Nikk Narrel wrote: Now, unless the cloaky came into the target system, hoping to get someone to hunt for them and get ambushed like that... Why was the cloaky present in the first place? ( I like fishing as much as the next player, but if that'...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.03.28 13:30:06
|
20. Sticky:AFK CloakingGäó: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Lucas Kell wrote: Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: Daichi Yamato wrote: Stuff. You seem to miss all points. Quite simply, an AFK cloaker forces a player to have to take more precautions in order to play which you have allu...
- by Raphael Celestine - at 2015.03.27 13:08:12
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |