| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 |
1001. CORE FOCUSED 175 hp/s :D - in General Discussions [original thread]
Cody Sietz wrote: Note to self:shoot bumblebees moar. Yeah, I was afraid that would be the reaction...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.05 16:13:00
|
1002. Beware: "Triple" SP Event - in General Discussions [original thread]
All this angst comes from the fact that our brains are wired to react more strongly to loss than gain . CCP introduced loss two ways, first by implying 3x Passive Active points and letting that impression last for days before killing it, second ...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.05 15:47:00
|
1003. [Feedback] The problem with defend orders - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Defend orders generate more bonus points. I put a capture order on the point in domination and received 20 points. If it was a defend order and there was a battle I probably would have doubled that easily.
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.03 19:27:00
|
1004. New SP Bundle please - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
What CCP should do is move to full SP rollover and change active boosters from time based to point based. What is today a 7 day booster would instead boost 200k worth of SP and the 30 day boost 900k. You can play when you want and the booster's ...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.03 16:37:00
|
1005. [REQUEST] Limit the amount of droplinks/nanohives people have on field - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
KingBlade82 wrote: Skihids wrote: KingBlade82 wrote: plz only if ur a PC vet respond.........I swear some of u have no idea what I mean didn't know I had to explain but "REAL GAMES" look like Christmas where santa-logis place 15 uplinks a...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.03 00:52:00
|
1006. nerfing the swarms range is a really bad idea. - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Evane Sa'edi wrote: What is the logic behind CCP's weapon development policy?? Milatary policy would be for bigger, better and more efficient weapon systems NOT cutting range on sub-par anti-armour weapons so that they are less than useless. Un...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.03 00:48:00
|
1007. request... intentional LAG fix (EQUIPMENT SPAM) - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Seminole RunningBear wrote: ive noticed that all someone has to do to cause extreme LAG is to first take the objective (domination)... lay down 24 drop uplinks, 53 nanohives, take the high ground, use forges and mass drivers... and bingo... the...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.02 19:06:00
|
1008. [REQUEST] Minimum distance between Drop Uplinks - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Silly Itch wrote: I'm tired of risking a dropship to place Drop uplinks in good positions only to have my team spawn there and plant 10 right next to mine , almost nullifying them. No two uplinks should be allowed to be placed within 5 meters ...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.02 18:54:00
|
1009. [REQUEST] Limit the amount of droplinks/nanohives people have on field - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
KingBlade82 wrote: plz only if ur a PC vet respond.........I swear some of u have no idea what I mean didn't know I had to explain but "REAL GAMES" look like Christmas where santa-logis place 15 uplinks and 15-20 nanos per team and when u come ...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.02 18:45:00
|
1010. [REQUEST] Limit the amount of droplinks/nanohives people have on field - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Smooth Assassin wrote: Uplinks should get a radius when placed down so no other noob tries to take your spot when placing another down especially if its a good spot, the higher the tier of uplink the more the radius. Do you people put thirty...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.02 18:41:00
|
1011. nerfing the swarms range is a really bad idea. - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
All AV range must be cut to support CCP's new vehicle model. Vehicles will have a short period of strength followed by a long cool-down period of vulnerability. AV range cannot extend across the entire map or these newly vulnerable vehicles will...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.02 14:46:00
|
1012. Nice Nerf - in General Discussions [original thread]
CuuCH Crusher wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Splash reduction the only one on the table now but possible other options are on the table if the need continues. Overall it will remain a heavy anti-vehicle weapon while the swarm launcher moves ...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.02 14:35:00
|
1013. WTF Reduced kill points!!!??? - in General Discussions [original thread]
Celus Ivara wrote: Equipment only rewards WP when they are used, not when they are deployed. Thus, if a player is getting WP off their equipment, it's because they did something useful for the team. This is as true of the hard-working dedicat...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.02 03:25:00
|
1014. Make uplink spam increase spawn time - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Quote: Effect: allows the defending team to respawn quickly, hindering conquest of the area by a small number of opponents who cannot destroy all of them quickly. - It isn't so much the speed of spawn, but the difficulty of preventing their ...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.02 02:28:00
|
1015. Make uplink spam increase spawn time - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
I'd like to get a clear description of the problem and how any proposed solution addresses it, along with consideration of unintended consequences. For example: [Ul]Closely spaced uplinks[/ul] Definition: Three or more uplinks within five meter...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.01 20:17:00
|
1016. Make uplink spam increase spawn time - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Your suggestion would basically make uplinks useless. I find that strategic use of uplinks involves deploying several in an arc at the battle front in Domination. A single uplink concentrates your team in one place that invites grenades and orbit...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.01 19:25:00
|
1017. Make uplink spam increase spawn time - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Krom Ganesh wrote: Skihids wrote: This isn't really required, but it's the least onerous way to discourage very close placement of uplinks. It's basically a stacking penalty like the others we are familiar with. Two uplinks close together i...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.01 17:57:00
|
1018. Make uplink spam increase spawn time - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
This isn't really required, but it's the least onerous way to discourage very close placement of uplinks. It's basically a stacking penalty like the others we are familiar with. Two uplinks close together increases the spawn time on each by a sma...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.01 15:38:00
|
1019. [REQUEST] Limit the amount of droplinks/nanohives people have on field - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Sana Rayya wrote: While there is some credence to the fact that heavy uplink/hive spam can cause lag in games (especially in the lab room facility), it is also very easy to clear said uplinks. Allotek fluxes + nanohives will get rid of everythi...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.01 15:30:00
|
1020. [Request] Only 1 active drop uplink per 100 meters - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Krom Ganesh wrote: How about instead of limiting their placement, uplinks within some distance of each other will cause an increase in spawn time? That way you could spam uplinks but it will take forever for your team to actually spawn. Of co...
- by Skihids - at 2013.11.01 15:17:00
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |