Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 |
41. Idea to for allowing capital ships in high security space - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
ShahFluffers wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Celthric Kanerian wrote: If Capitals were able to access hisec, alliances would store them in hisec for safekeeping until they need them, thereby removing all risk in owning them. You do reali...
- by zus - at 2016.08.03 22:29:49
|
42. Fighter Movement - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
it would be nice to be able to see the tactical perspective of your fighters / drones and their weapons range once they are selected.
- by zus - at 2016.08.03 22:16:34
|
43. - Inheriting criminal Flag from incident - - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Pandora Carrollon wrote: The only reason the suspect flag is a joke is that HiSec players (and counted myself as one for the last several months) don't take it upon themselves to police their own areas. A small roam gang in HiSec could toodle ...
- by zus - at 2016.08.03 00:54:18
|
44. - Inheriting criminal Flag from incident - - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Caco De'mon wrote: A8ina wrote: Inheriting criminal Flag from incident maintains the intent of the original purpose of criminal flag , Police is not stupid don't steal from a crime scene within a certain time frame I thing this fix will re...
- by zus - at 2016.08.03 00:15:58
|
45. - Proposal 4 allowing Secure Containers to Function in Cargo - - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Ralph King-Griffin wrote: zus wrote: Jonah Gravenstein wrote: zus wrote: Therefore removing the exploit What exploit? An individuals attacks and destroys Industrial Ship he gets criminal Flag Police attacks and destroys crimin...
- by zus - at 2016.07.31 16:31:21
|
46. - Proposal 4 allowing Secure Containers to Function in Cargo - - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Dark Lord Trump wrote: zus wrote: Jonah Gravenstein wrote: zus wrote: Therefore removing the exploit What exploit? An individuals attacks and destroys Industrial Ship he gets criminal Flag Police attacks and destroys criminal ...
- by zus - at 2016.07.31 00:32:42
|
47. - Proposal 4 allowing Secure Containers to Function in Cargo - - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Jonah Gravenstein wrote: zus wrote: Therefore removing the exploit What exploit? An individuals attacks and destroys Industrial Ship he gets criminal Flag Police attacks and destroys criminal next individual comes and loots he gets...
- by zus - at 2016.07.30 22:58:30
|
48. - Proposal 4 allowing Secure Containers to Function in Cargo - - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Dark Lord Trump wrote: zus wrote: Dark Lord Trump wrote: zus wrote: Dark Lord Trump wrote: Every suicide gank would just include a guy in a T1 explo frigate to hack the container. I'll take giving the ganker half my stuff over all o...
- by zus - at 2016.07.30 21:06:58
|
49. - Proposal 4 allowing Secure Containers to Function in Cargo - - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Jonah Gravenstein wrote: zus wrote: Jonah Gravenstein wrote: Only if you have to put stuff in the vault in the first place, stuff automatically transferring to a vault upon destruction of a ship implies that the vault doesn't have a lock ...
- by zus - at 2016.07.30 20:14:18
|
50. - Proposal 4 allowing Secure Containers to Function in Cargo - - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Dark Lord Trump wrote: zus wrote: Dark Lord Trump wrote: Every suicide gank would just include a guy in a T1 explo frigate to hack the container. I'll take giving the ganker half my stuff over all of it any day. If this is an illegal a...
- by zus - at 2016.07.30 20:10:10
|
51. - Proposal 4 allowing Secure Containers to Function in Cargo - - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Jonah Gravenstein wrote: Only if you have to put stuff in the vault in the first place, stuff automatically transferring to a vault upon destruction of a ship implies that the vault doesn't have a lock in the first place. The vault should also...
- by zus - at 2016.07.30 19:47:48
|
52. - ATTENTION - - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Need for Capsuleer awareness program of EVE Forum , EVE Gate ,and the CSM and they're role in the game. New players have no idea of the above mentioned and how they give a direction in to the game New players have to be introduced to this infor...
- by zus - at 2016.07.30 17:43:56
|
53. - Proposal 4 allowing Secure Containers to Function in Cargo - - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Dark Lord Trump wrote: Every suicide gank would just include a guy in a T1 explo frigate to hack the container. I'll take giving the ganker half my stuff over all of it any day. If this is an illegal action he better move fast before the pol...
- by zus - at 2016.07.30 16:48:03
|
54. - Proposal 4 allowing Secure Containers to Function in Cargo - - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Iain Cariaba wrote: A very wise person once uttered the words, "You keep what you kill." The person who destroyed your ship gets what the loot fairy gives them of your stuff. That is how it works in EvE. Of course and you keep what you kill...
- by zus - at 2016.07.30 16:42:33
|
55. COSMOS Missions are broken - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
COSMOS Missions definitely are in need of same Love , they're very entertaining mission idea
- by zus - at 2016.07.29 02:49:32
|
56. - Proposal 4 allowing Secure Containers to Function in Cargo - - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
The suggestion is to allow the Secure Containers to function in cargo, Allowing password setup in cargo without anchoring and continuous function in Space after ship loss.
- by zus - at 2016.07.28 16:40:07
|
57. - Proposal of Ship Scanning as Hostile Act Resolution - - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Mephiztopheleze wrote: zus wrote: After this discussion i came to the realization that a scanning suppression signal unit needs to be developed although a unit like this can greatly interfere with ship's sensors it will provide the privacy...
- by zus - at 2016.07.27 23:22:35
|
58. - Proposal of Ship Scanning as Hostile Act Resolution - - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Ralph King-Griffin wrote: zus wrote: After this discussion i came to the realization that a scanning suppression signal unit needs to be developed although a unit like this can greatly interfere with ship's sensors it will provide the priv...
- by zus - at 2016.07.27 18:20:44
|
59. - Proposal of Ship Scanning as Hostile Act Resolution - - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
Brokk Witgenstein wrote: Ummmm wise guy. Freighters don't have fitting- where exactly would we put those Scan Suppressors, and secondly ... is it wise to fit something that'll make you primary while at the same time gimping your tank? 3 low...
- by zus - at 2016.07.27 18:18:51
|
60. - Proposal of Ship Scanning as Hostile Act Resolution - - in EVE General Discussion [original thread]
After this discussion i came to the realization that a scanning suppression signal unit needs to be developed although a unit like this can greatly interfere with ship's sensors it will provide the privacy and ease of mind to those who select to...
- by zus - at 2016.07.27 17:28:41
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |