| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 |
1161. New Dropship WP Is Ineffective - A "Must Read" for CCP - in General Discussions [original thread]
After reading the title I was all set to explain why nobody was using your dropship. Then I read your post and learned the someone was actually using the dropship as an assault troop carrier. My heart leapt at the news! Then the explanation groun...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.13 01:18:00
|
1162. LOGI, LEECHES, CRY BABIES AND U - in General Discussions [original thread]
This should be cooperation rather than competition on the same team, but I think it's the nature of FPS to bring out the solo player who wants the top slot rather than the win. The typical FPS encourages the cult of KDR and that encourages some t...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.12 19:40:00
|
1163. Lovely Logis - in General Discussions [original thread]
Kallas Hallytyr wrote: I need a watchlist of butthurt kill-whores so I can follow them and needle them in front of enemies... In game watch lists would be a nice thing, but then whiners would probably just switch to complaining on an alt.
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.12 19:26:00
|
1164. Trade the Asault equpment slot for a slayer bonus? - in General Discussions [original thread]
TBH I'm not especially thrilled with the idea, I'm just thinking out loud about this problem. We've got some vocal posters who complain about Logistics earaning more rewards than the killers who assert that they can run around self sufficient with...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.12 19:24:00
|
1165. Trade the Asault equpment slot for a slayer bonus? - in General Discussions [original thread]
I was happy with the status quo, but apparently some are upset that Logis can equal the Assault in WP's when the Assault player can run around completely self sufficient. I'm just looking for a solution to their crisis that leaves the Logi as a ...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.12 01:09:00
|
1166. Trade the Asault equpment slot for a slayer bonus? - in General Discussions [original thread]
One of our more vocal posters made a point that the Logi can be reduant when there are six Assault players with six equipment slots between them. Did CCP mean for squads of six to be self sufficient without a dedicated Logi? Is there a need for d...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.12 00:56:00
|
1167. Why is the Easiest role in Dust rewarded the most? - in General Discussions [original thread]
A poster did make a good point about removing the equipment slot from assault suits. Six assault players have six slots between them making a Logi redundant. Assaults are designed for slaying and don't really have room or fitting left over for hu...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.12 00:37:00
|
1168. Why is the Easiest role in Dust rewarded the most? - in General Discussions [original thread]
ReGnYuM wrote: Skihids wrote: ReGnYuM wrote: bethany valvetino wrote: Cosgar wrote: You're a ****ing idiot! I wanted to attack this **** head verbally.. sadly this statement sums up my thoughts 100% firstly, logistic is not the ...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.11 17:08:00
|
1169. Why is the Easiest role in Dust rewarded the most? - in General Discussions [original thread]
ReGnYuM wrote: bethany valvetino wrote: Cosgar wrote: You're a ****ing idiot! I wanted to attack this **** head verbally.. sadly this statement sums up my thoughts 100% firstly, logistic is not the easiet role on the battle field and ...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.11 16:16:00
|
1170. Why is the Easiest role in Dust rewarded the most? - in General Discussions [original thread]
Justin Tymes wrote: Except it's not. Logis get next to nothing when you're winning by a landslide, slayers get all the WP. If Logis are getting alot of WP, slayers just need to get better. This is the truth. I get the most WPs when my suppor...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.11 16:14:00
|
1171. lolderpship - in General Discussions [original thread]
Takahiro Kashuken wrote: It does for me, if it isnt agile to begin with and i can barely see whats around me it aint going to work Take the little bird has a good view and is responsive plus AV doesnt knock it around like a feather in the w...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.10 17:59:00
|
1172. lolderpship - in General Discussions [original thread]
iceyburnz wrote: I don't undertsand why we can't have a cockpit view for dropships. Laziness. There is no technical reason it can't be done.
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.10 14:53:00
|
1173. lolderpship - in General Discussions [original thread]
Takahiro Kashuken wrote: Skihids wrote: Mercs have no incentive to ride in a dropship. It's like offering a bus driver minimum wage to buy a bus and run a route in a war zone and at the sme time you offer individuals risk free teleportation ...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.10 14:43:00
|
1174. I wonder what they'll be working on next. - in General Discussions [original thread]
CCP will eventually completely overhaul vehicles. I'm guessing it will start in January or February and last six months. They will be testing everything in production so it's going to take a long time and cause quite a disruption.
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.10 06:37:00
|
1175. Dropships and Cameras. (1.5) - in General Discussions [original thread]
We need a first person view that looks "through" the hull via hull mounted cameras. With that we can look in any direction wthout the ship obscuring our view from the cockpit location. The cockpit PoV would let us land and fly thorugh tight spot...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.09 15:16:00
|
1176. lolderpship - in General Discussions [original thread]
Mercs have no incentive to ride in a dropship. It's like offering a bus driver minimum wage to buy a bus and run a route in a war zone and at the sme time you offer individuals risk free teleportation and short hikes to objectives. No third perso...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.09 13:47:00
|
1177. CCP's Universal "Equalizer" - The Weekly SP Cap - in General Discussions [original thread]
CoD only lasts year, then you buy it all over again and everyone starts fom the beginning.
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.07 21:06:00
|
1178. BPO Speculation - in General Discussions [original thread]
Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote: I think the main reason for pulling BPOs is that while it encourages AUR sales, it is doing more harm then good by further promoting the isk surplus we have, and the devs have already stated that they need more isk sinks ...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.06 21:39:00
|
1179. BPO Speculation - in General Discussions [original thread]
The thing is they are announcing the end of most BPOs, but not tellings us why. That could be for some boring pedestrian reason that they didn't feel the need to announce, but when someone starts singing "I've got a secret, I've got a secret!" on...
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.06 21:26:00
|
1180. BPO Speculation - in General Discussions [original thread]
Crash Monster wrote: In before speculation shutdown? I saw a post (I don't recall who it was) talking about suit and weapon variants with the idea that it would be a good reason to get rid of BPO availability. How so?
- by Skihids - at 2013.10.06 21:23:00
|
| 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 |