Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bund
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 07:34:00 -
[1]
Logistics != Tacklers
Logistics ships are T2 cruisers with support-oriented bonuses to non-offensive capabilities such as capacitor and shield transfer. However, some players have chosen to exploit their T2-level resists and increased fitting capabilities to turn them into deceptively fast and exceptionally well-tanked heavy tacklers.
This is a blatant exploit of game mechanics. The CCP description of the Logistics ship class is very clear: "Support ships, engineered for field assistance in large engagements." Given the role bonuses, it is clear that this "field assistance" was intended to take the form of remote boosting of gang mates, not offensive action against hostile ships.
Fix this exploit by limiting Logistics ships to fitting only those modules which achieve the design intent of remote support. Offensive ewar modules and certainly weapons should be impossible to fit on these ships. To leave this exploit intact is to break the design of the game itself.
I reiterate:
Logistics != Tacklers
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 07:57:00 -
[2]
SAND BOX.
----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP need...more room... |
Hopeless EQUILIBRIUM
Caldari W33D Corp. O X I D E
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 08:31:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Bund Logistics != Tacklers
Logistics ships are T2 cruisers with support-oriented bonuses to non-offensive capabilities such as capacitor and shield transfer. However, some players have chosen to exploit their T2-level resists and increased fitting capabilities to turn them into deceptively fast and exceptionally well-tanked heavy tacklers.
This is a blatant exploit of game mechanics. The CCP description of the Logistics ship class is very clear: "Support ships, engineered for field assistance in large engagements." Given the role bonuses, it is clear that this "field assistance" was intended to take the form of remote boosting of gang mates, not offensive action against hostile ships.
Fix this exploit by limiting Logistics ships to fitting only those modules which achieve the design intent of remote support. Offensive ewar modules and certainly weapons should be impossible to fit on these ships. To leave this exploit intact is to break the design of the game itself.
I reiterate:
Logistics != Tacklers
GET A LIFE LEARN TO PLAY The real Eve game is outside the forum so stop asking for nerfing.
|
Alais Wiccanfae
Gallente Templars of Space Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 08:54:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Alais Wiccanfae on 31/10/2007 08:54:40 Please see this thread - then you might understand what he's getting at
Linkage
About 2/3 the way down
|
Eleana Tomelac
Gallente Through the Looking Glass
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 10:32:00 -
[5]
Bund is a fan of CCP Gangleri? -- Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast !
Say hello to my tiny friends ! |
Mandrain
Amarr Privateers Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 12:10:00 -
[6]
:) 1 word : GoonSwarm
|
Darth Nerf
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 12:40:00 -
[7]
Posting in a CCP Gangleri fan-thread!!
|
infinityshok
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 20:31:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Bund Logistics != Tacklers
Logistics ships are T2 cruisers with support-oriented bonuses to non-offensive capabilities such as capacitor and shield transfer. However, some players have chosen to exploit their T2-level resists and increased fitting capabilities to turn them into deceptively fast and exceptionally well-tanked heavy tacklers.
This is a blatant exploit of game mechanics. The CCP description of the Logistics ship class is very clear: "Support ships, engineered for field assistance in large engagements." Given the role bonuses, it is clear that this "field assistance" was intended to take the form of remote boosting of gang mates, not offensive action against hostile ships.
Fix this exploit by limiting Logistics ships to fitting only those modules which achieve the design intent of remote support. Offensive ewar modules and certainly weapons should be impossible to fit on these ships. To leave this exploit intact is to break the design of the game itself.
I reiterate:
Logistics != Tacklers
Signed.
I was mining in my carrier the other day and some logistic ship tackled me while a destroyer blowed up my drones then popped my ship. If that logistics ship hadnt tackled me that destroyer wouldnt have had a chance against my hanger full of t2 mining drones. This is utter and complete ****** that I cant mine without worrying about these overpowered ships **** my **** while im *****. Come on CCCP...stop ***** ***** and **** to fix this ***** *******.
I feel certain CCCP Gangrene has no fans after that post he made in the carrier thread.
|
Eka Maladay
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 20:49:00 -
[9]
Originally by: MotherMoon SAND BOX.
Just stop replying
|
Tadehiro
Kudzu Collective Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 21:49:00 -
[10]
/signed!
|
|
Dan Grobag
Caldari Oyster Colors
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 21:54:00 -
[11]
It cost less because there is less demand maybe.
|
Kwint Sommer
Incoherent Inc Otaku Invasion
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 22:19:00 -
[12]
I agree with CCP on this one, any ship that doesn't conform to its intended use is broken and needs to be fixed, preferably with a heavy swing from the nerf bat. Carriers are the worst offenders but there are many others, thanks OP for pointing out several of them. With any luck they'll all be not just nerfed back into there proper rolls but nerfed into near uselessness just to make sure it never happens again. Sig removed. Please keep sigs to 400x120 pixels and 24000 bytes in size or less. -Kaemonn |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |