Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Drutort
|
Posted - 2003.09.15 02:08:00 -
[271]
nope the main thread still has "Max Velocity"
support Idea: QuickInfo an alternative to ShowInfo
my MoBlog |
Drutort
|
Posted - 2003.09.15 02:08:00 -
[272]
nope the main thread still has "Max Velocity"
|
Juan Andalusian
|
Posted - 2003.09.15 07:07:00 -
[273]
Dutort the main thread has Max Velocity in the Non penalised list.
**Pain is meant to be felt** |
Juan Andalusian
|
Posted - 2003.09.15 07:07:00 -
[274]
Dutort the main thread has Max Velocity in the Non penalised list.
**Pain is meant to be felt** |
Drutort
|
Posted - 2003.09.15 08:01:00 -
[275]
Quote: Dutort the main thread has Max Velocity in the Non penalised list.
doh tahts what i get for reading and posting late (3am) support Idea: QuickInfo an alternative to ShowInfo
my MoBlog |
Drutort
|
Posted - 2003.09.15 08:01:00 -
[276]
Quote: Dutort the main thread has Max Velocity in the Non penalised list.
doh tahts what i get for reading and posting late (3am)
|
Lysithea
|
Posted - 2003.09.15 19:38:00 -
[277]
After reading this, I firmly believe that the next patch is going to do nothing but upset people and force the devs to repeal it with another patch (which will take another few weeks). I don't think I have the time or money to wait around for the game to work. I would much rather see small adjustments that get us closer to perfection than see repetitive over-compensations that take us from A to Z before finally settling back at M.
Stop the insanity and ease us forward. Don't drive us off a cliff then try to drag us back up.
|
Lysithea
|
Posted - 2003.09.15 19:38:00 -
[278]
After reading this, I firmly believe that the next patch is going to do nothing but upset people and force the devs to repeal it with another patch (which will take another few weeks). I don't think I have the time or money to wait around for the game to work. I would much rather see small adjustments that get us closer to perfection than see repetitive over-compensations that take us from A to Z before finally settling back at M.
Stop the insanity and ease us forward. Don't drive us off a cliff then try to drag us back up.
|
OffBeaT
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 07:07:00 -
[279]
iv been sluging it out in a merlin,kestrel,moa for awhile now & find these ships depend on missiles too be successful in an attack. i dont think that the missiles need too be weakend at all they seem too weak as it is too me, it shouldnt take me 2 havoc's with heavy missile rank to 3 too take out one weak bot and its even worse with fof missiles i have too use too many too stay in 04-07 space and mine in a moa. i cant keep enough rockets loaded or stocked, let alone aford them, know wonder evryone is running for the thorax it got no problems it seems mining and fighting in that space alone.. the moa is a let down an soon they will be too many thorax cruisers around making the game less diversified... ass for afterburner stacking you guys gota leave afterburners alone and let us use them as we have been.. we worked hard too get our skills too lvl in-order too use them as we do docking and in fast attack strikes with frigets.. witch need the speed badly, "god knows." i cant get crap for fire power on one it would be nice too get some torpedos on a friget like 2 with some fof missiles for fast attacks on cargo ships and cruisers i mean what friget this day and age cant carry torpedos huh? an since when are modren torpedos slow and dum.. it will drive me crzy too go back too craling back and forth from astroid feild to station just too take so long too get back too find my ore is gone or stolen becouse it took me forever to get back too it. it would make it real boring too get around slow in this game again and i dont know if i would wont too play it moving that slow again.. it just takes too much time too do anything. you cant even do a suprise attack in this game if you dont got the speed to do it.. so i say leave them alone. think of the newbees too who need that speed too get away from jump gate killes.. i do not wona be slow when i approach a gate let me tell you or im dead in 04 an under space.
|
OffBeaT
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 07:07:00 -
[280]
iv been sluging it out in a merlin,kestrel,moa for awhile now & find these ships depend on missiles too be successful in an attack. i dont think that the missiles need too be weakend at all they seem too weak as it is too me, it shouldnt take me 2 havoc's with heavy missile rank to 3 too take out one weak bot and its even worse with fof missiles i have too use too many too stay in 04-07 space and mine in a moa. i cant keep enough rockets loaded or stocked, let alone aford them, know wonder evryone is running for the thorax it got no problems it seems mining and fighting in that space alone.. the moa is a let down an soon they will be too many thorax cruisers around making the game less diversified... ass for afterburner stacking you guys gota leave afterburners alone and let us use them as we have been.. we worked hard too get our skills too lvl in-order too use them as we do docking and in fast attack strikes with frigets.. witch need the speed badly, "god knows." i cant get crap for fire power on one it would be nice too get some torpedos on a friget like 2 with some fof missiles for fast attacks on cargo ships and cruisers i mean what friget this day and age cant carry torpedos huh? an since when are modren torpedos slow and dum.. it will drive me crzy too go back too craling back and forth from astroid feild to station just too take so long too get back too find my ore is gone or stolen becouse it took me forever to get back too it. it would make it real boring too get around slow in this game again and i dont know if i would wont too play it moving that slow again.. it just takes too much time too do anything. you cant even do a suprise attack in this game if you dont got the speed to do it.. so i say leave them alone. think of the newbees too who need that speed too get away from jump gate killes.. i do not wona be slow when i approach a gate let me tell you or im dead in 04 an under space.
|
|
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 17:55:00 -
[281]
Well nerfed, very well nerfed.
You can be proud of you fubaring the game in this way.
3 sensor dampeners could have been countered easily (e.g. auto-targeting drones, sensor-boosters, MWD to get closer).
3 shield hardeners could have been countered easily (superior firepower, torpedos / cruise missiles, cap draining).
Now you invented a way to make the modules pretty much obsolete for a solo PvP pirate.
TomB's "immune against every damage type"-talk is theoretical bull****, I don't see anything wrong when 3 battleships have to fire at a "tank" for a longer time to destroy it, but the "tank" can't harm them at all, cause he needs the cap for the shield recharging & hardening.
There was no real neeed for this changes.
Time to train up mining & astro and sell the account.
|
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 17:55:00 -
[282]
Well nerfed, very well nerfed.
You can be proud of you fubaring the game in this way.
3 sensor dampeners could have been countered easily (e.g. auto-targeting drones, sensor-boosters, MWD to get closer).
3 shield hardeners could have been countered easily (superior firepower, torpedos / cruise missiles, cap draining).
Now you invented a way to make the modules pretty much obsolete for a solo PvP pirate.
TomB's "immune against every damage type"-talk is theoretical bull****, I don't see anything wrong when 3 battleships have to fire at a "tank" for a longer time to destroy it, but the "tank" can't harm them at all, cause he needs the cap for the shield recharging & hardening.
There was no real neeed for this changes.
Time to train up mining & astro and sell the account.
|
Doc Evil
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 18:03:00 -
[283]
Quote: Well nerfed, very well nerfed. <SNIP>
TomB's "immune against every damage type"-talk is theoretical bull****, I don't see anything wrong when 3 battleships have to fire at a "tank" for a longer time to destroy it, but the "tank" can't harm them at all, cause he needs the cap for the shield recharging & hardening. <SNIP>
Oh.. but there is a "tank" that can cause major damage. All they need to do is equip projectiles (little to no cap useage) and now they shell out damage yet can't be hurt.
TomB made the right change here, I think you are failing to see the big picture.
|
Doc Evil
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 18:03:00 -
[284]
Quote: Well nerfed, very well nerfed. <SNIP>
TomB's "immune against every damage type"-talk is theoretical bull****, I don't see anything wrong when 3 battleships have to fire at a "tank" for a longer time to destroy it, but the "tank" can't harm them at all, cause he needs the cap for the shield recharging & hardening. <SNIP>
Oh.. but there is a "tank" that can cause major damage. All they need to do is equip projectiles (little to no cap useage) and now they shell out damage yet can't be hurt.
TomB made the right change here, I think you are failing to see the big picture.
|
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 19:09:00 -
[285]
"Oh.. but there is a "tank" that can cause major damage. All they need to do is equip projectiles (little to no cap useage) and now they shell out damage yet can't be hurt.
TomB made the right change here, I think you are failing to see the big picture."
What big picture please?
ROFL.
You must be kidding.
Module stacking nerfs have been here since the retail release and do you know what? There will be more coming.
If someone at CCP would have the big picture it wouldn't be changed that often.
By the way your argument is pretty much obsolete, the projectile damage is new. You can't mix new damage behaviour with old shield hardneners behaviour.
It is just a shame that people like TomB screw the game so much by gimping defensive modules.
|
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 19:09:00 -
[286]
"Oh.. but there is a "tank" that can cause major damage. All they need to do is equip projectiles (little to no cap useage) and now they shell out damage yet can't be hurt.
TomB made the right change here, I think you are failing to see the big picture."
What big picture please?
ROFL.
You must be kidding.
Module stacking nerfs have been here since the retail release and do you know what? There will be more coming.
If someone at CCP would have the big picture it wouldn't be changed that often.
By the way your argument is pretty much obsolete, the projectile damage is new. You can't mix new damage behaviour with old shield hardneners behaviour.
It is just a shame that people like TomB screw the game so much by gimping defensive modules.
|
Doc Evil
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 19:31:00 -
[287]
Quote:
What big picture please?
ROFL.
You must be kidding.
Module stacking nerfs have been here since the retail release and do you know what? There will be more coming.
If someone at CCP would have the big picture it wouldn't be changed that often.
By the way your argument is pretty much obsolete, the projectile damage is new. You can't mix new damage behaviour with old shield hardneners behaviour.
It is just a shame that people like TomB screw the game so much by gimping defensive modules.
If you can't mix the new weapons with the old damage behavior, why were you complaining about the stacking nerf?
|
Doc Evil
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 19:31:00 -
[288]
Quote:
What big picture please?
ROFL.
You must be kidding.
Module stacking nerfs have been here since the retail release and do you know what? There will be more coming.
If someone at CCP would have the big picture it wouldn't be changed that often.
By the way your argument is pretty much obsolete, the projectile damage is new. You can't mix new damage behaviour with old shield hardneners behaviour.
It is just a shame that people like TomB screw the game so much by gimping defensive modules.
If you can't mix the new weapons with the old damage behavior, why were you complaining about the stacking nerf?
|
Nomad Jin
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 22:29:00 -
[289]
There is one minor problem that I can see on this list.
Tracking computers, enhancers...2 different items that operate in two different methods to provide an improvment. Computers figure velocity/path projection...enhancers increase the actual rotational speed of the turrets.
Any other situations where the improvemnt is a different form should still have stacking capability. I agree with the no stacking of same category items though such as a gauss stabilizer vs a magnetc stabilizer.
Nomad Jin
|
Nomad Jin
|
Posted - 2003.09.17 22:29:00 -
[290]
There is one minor problem that I can see on this list.
Tracking computers, enhancers...2 different items that operate in two different methods to provide an improvment. Computers figure velocity/path projection...enhancers increase the actual rotational speed of the turrets.
Any other situations where the improvemnt is a different form should still have stacking capability. I agree with the no stacking of same category items though such as a gauss stabilizer vs a magnetc stabilizer.
Nomad Jin
|
|
Jubeli
|
Posted - 2003.09.23 16:33:00 -
[291]
GOOD post this *bump*
but as I'm not a mathimaticall genious I can't understand the meaning of the x^(1/naga092461... stuff...
Can someone tell me if I have 40km target range and someone stick 1-5 normal dampeners against me.
The first one will say 50% that I know.. thank you CCP.. but the second one? The third one??
damn CCP for making me learn mathematics like this! ;)
this might have been a well done change but this complicated?? hmm |
SebbyTheFreak
|
Posted - 2006.01.24 05:41:00 -
[292]
Personnally, I'd say less slots, near impossible stacking, but far stronger modules.
Also, something to counter-attack webbing? Cuz seriously... The -ONLY- weapon a smaller ship has against a larger one is just that... speed... and there is a 100% sure way of removing that. Kinda lame, especially since nearly everyone fits one of those. I mean, if it's scramble strenght 3 or something It doesn't matter, just get something against it!
|
My grandfather
|
Posted - 2006.01.24 05:47:00 -
[293]
Originally by: SebbyTheFreak Personnally, I'd say less slots, near impossible stacking, but far stronger modules.
Also, something to counter-attack webbing? Cuz seriously... The -ONLY- weapon a smaller ship has against a larger one is just that... speed... and there is a 100% sure way of removing that. Kinda lame, especially since nearly everyone fits one of those. I mean, if it's scramble strenght 3 or something It doesn't matter, just get something against it!
WTF????????????????? UUUUBER-thread necromancy? Sebby, did you even check the dates on the posts? Last one was from september 2003!
|
keepiru
|
Posted - 2006.01.24 05:58:00 -
[294]
X-Treem thread necromancy :o
extremely ftl >.>; ------------- Please fix the stacking algorythm, it's a disgrace!
|
My grandfather
|
Posted - 2006.01.24 06:07:00 -
[295]
Originally by: keepiru X-Treem thread necromancy :o
extremely ftl >.>;
Hmm suddenly the line in your sig seems fitting in the thread
It's fun to see TomB's old alter ego though
|
Shamis Orzoz
|
Posted - 2006.01.24 06:36:00 -
[296]
I smell Shin Ra
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |