EVE Search - Posts by Roime

Search EVE-Online forums for:

Result 1381-1400 of 4139 for by author Roime (0,50 seconds)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 [70] 80 90 100 200
1381. feature for alt-account - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] This feature is availabe for corporations, set up a POS. You can also share assets in corp hangars in station (rent an office), but I'm not sure if that includes a shared ship hangar. That said, alts are bad, mkay. Don't start, you'll be trapped... - by Roime - at 2013.01.25 09:19:00
1382. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Mag's wrote: Does anyone else get the feeling that the speed penalty changing to the PG penalty, is like getting out of the frying pan into the fire? It's massively better than speed penalty in burst tanking, but yes, it will cause problems.... - by Roime - at 2013.01.25 09:10:00
1383. C1 LS Traffic - in Wormholes [original thread] Hisec static isn't that much better, 90% of visitors that come in are nubs on their first visit to wormholes, only rarely you get any kind of proper fights from HS. And even then it happens on the hisec hole, which is as much fun as station games.... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 16:38:00
1384. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Ribikoka wrote: Please u tard bring to me this crap fitted myrm against my harbinger and let see how fast die Is that a public call-out for a 1vs1? Just say when, baby, I'm game - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 16:32:00
1385. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Ribikoka wrote: HTFU. When someone speak from BS and BC your "real arguments" is how can fit a cruiser ? 1600mm it's a boss module for you and a joke argument for me, like you. :PPPPPPP HTFU? Harden up like rick-rolled tungsten? But I am ... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 16:27:00
1386. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Ribikoka wrote: without implant and 1124dps in your dream. And that 65 more damage is 23 dps but 100+ dps for harbinger. [Myrmidon, Ribikoka's Dream] Internal Force Field Array I Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Dr... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 15:57:00
1387. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] If you don't have any real arguments, and can't even post that zero-content in a civilized manner, I think it's actually you should stop posting. 1600mm II is the biggest buffer module in the game. It simply needs to come with serious drawbacks.... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 15:35:00
1388. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Ribikoka wrote: Veshta Yoshida wrote: Look at the drone bay characteristics and say that again .. Realy, thats a damage boost ? LOL Still idiots playing with FW. Yes, Myrm got 65 more drone dps, which is more than one Neutron Blaste... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 15:12:00
1389. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Ribikoka wrote: Ribikoka wrote: So this skill just waste of training time and a big nothing. You think about it dear developer, pilots for the gap,the BS or BC pilots will use 800mm plates and they want to lose +10-15k armor (with bonuses) ... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 14:52:00
1390. [Idea] Possible Changes in future balance iterations to specialized drone boats ... - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Probably because ships with only drones as weapons (no turrets, no neuts) don't work. - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 14:30:00
1391. The beeps from hell - in EVE General Discussion [original thread] Don't worry It's just EVE telling you that you do too much PVE - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 13:41:00
1392. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Tsubutai wrote: Roime wrote: Shield tanks are not supposed to have full tackle, that's a huge factor in the balance. This is simply untrue. Off the top of my head, the following shield tankers can all fit class-appropriate tanks with full ... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 13:40:00
1393. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Sig difference matters only as long as no MWD is used. MWD sig bloom is so significant, that it completely equalizes the damage shield and armor tanks take in the most typical real combat situations. All weapons all the way up to capital size hit ... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 12:55:00
1394. T3 logi and their crap range. - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Of course resists help, that's why T2 logi > T1. You're just stuck on this spider tanking idea, forgetting completely that logis work in pairs or groups because they rarely can fit any viable local tank to heal themselves in combat, and often r... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 12:40:00
1395. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Ribikoka wrote: So this skill just waste of training time and a big nothing. You think about it dear developer, pilots for the gap,the BS or BC pilots will use 800mm plates and they want to lose +10-15k armor (with bonuses) when they use 2 or ... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 12:20:00
1396. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Rented wrote: Perihelion Olenard wrote: So what? That ASB becomes almost useless once it's out of charges. An armor tank will now easily outlast that and easily tank your 500 DPS BC. After these changes a myrmidon will be able to tank as wel... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 10:38:00
1397. T3 logi and their crap range. - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] They get the 5% resist bonus because the logi subsys gives +1 high slot (which is away from either lows or mids), meaning that it would tank considerably less than with other subsystems. Resist bonus balances this slot layout, but you still end wi... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 10:02:00
1398. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Akturous wrote: You can't fit a gang link to a BC without gimping it's fit supurbly, especially with the nerfing of fittings on the tier 2 BC's. When will you learn, you need to reduce the fitting requirements of gang links if you want people ... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 09:08:00
1399. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] CCP Fozzie wrote: Ok time to get feedback on the next iteration. Once of the things we have refocused on since this thread started is that with warfare link changes potentially on the not too distant horizon we needed to build these ships for ... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 09:01:00
1400. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread] Tsubutai wrote: Mynna, even after the GMP buff, webs are still mandatory on HAM ships that are geared to very small scale pvp, for damage application and for range control, so posting webless setups because they produce nice-at-first-glance tan... - by Roime - at 2013.01.24 08:46:00
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 [70] 80 90 100 200
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.