| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 |
3741. Ammo for vehicles idea -- let's put it to a vote. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Ripley Riley wrote: I don't think it is a stupid idea, personally. Infantry have to worry about ammo consumption so why shouldn't vehicles? Because infantry don't have to go all the way b...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 14:43:00
|
3742. Ammo for vehicles idea -- let's put it to a vote. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Delta 749 wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: Ripley Riley wrote: I don't think it is a stupid idea, personally. Infantry have to worry about ammo consumption so why shouldn't vehicles? Because infantry don't have to go all the way back to ...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 14:40:00
|
3743. Ammo for vehicles idea -- let's put it to a vote. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Ripley Riley wrote: I don't think it is a stupid idea, personally. Infantry have to worry about ammo consumption so why shouldn't vehicles? Because you have PRO AV.
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 14:39:00
|
3744. Vehicles: Don't be fooled by IWS Multiplier stuff - in General Discussions [original thread]
Iron Wolf Saber wrote: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqHgiF-KXQZXdFZ2ZzEyNW1neVdqYUF4bXU5NUdUOXc&usp=docslist_api#gid=2 My Evidence Lets pick Oh say HAV New HAV operation requires lvl 5 Vehicle command and HAV 1 Tally = 31...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 09:24:00
|
3745. Tanks - in General Discussions [original thread]
Lynn Beck wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Fire of Prometheus wrote: They are removing all specialized vehicles, I.e. Assault dropships, logi dropships, enforcer tanks (not that anyone really uses them) and the 2 LAV v...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 08:45:00
|
3746. Tanks - in General Discussions [original thread]
Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Fire of Prometheus wrote: They are removing all specialized vehicles, I.e. Assault dropships, logi dropships, enforcer tanks (not that anyone really uses them) and the 2 LAV variants. that will most likely make all p...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 07:04:00
|
3747. 1.7 Tanker contact with CCP. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Kasote Denzara wrote: Am I one of the people that honestly does not give a **** about the vehicles? I'm honestly more hurt about how I can't be a Gallentean heavy... So then why are you posting on here?
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 06:48:00
|
3748. Announcement:Vehicle Changes and Beyond - Part 2 - in General Discussions [original thread]
Lanius Pulvis wrote: Okay, so on a longer look I've decided the turrets are all a joke. Really, the only turret that out ranges swarms is a large rail turret!? I assume these changes will affect the AI turrets as well. Clearly you don't intend ...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 06:02:00
|
3749. 1.7 Tanker contact with CCP. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Meeko Fent wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: If a thread is made about abolishing 1.7 and has 30 signatures, 1.7 will be abolished. 1.7 is making tanks a bigger sp sink and nerfing tanks into the groud ...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 05:21:00
|
3750. 1.7 Tanker contact with CCP. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Meeko Fent wrote: Because then ANYBODY can be AV Herp-a-Derp. Just like how anybody could be a good tanker and not get it blown up even in the current environment. LOL!
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 05:07:00
|
3751. 1.7 Tanker contact with CCP. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Meeko Fent wrote: Void Echo wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: Hate to answer a question with a question, but in what way do you think effectively reverting vehicle/infantry balance to what it was before would help? The idea now is to have vehi...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 05:04:00
|
3752. 1.7 Tanker contact with CCP. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Mobius Wyvern wrote: 4 Proto AVers had to use 3 shots each to kill a Madrugar , not a Marauder. Please explain to me with your infinite wisdom how that scenario is in any way balanced. Sounds like they used teamwork to me. Don't have a p...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 05:03:00
|
3753. 1.7 Tanker contact with CCP. - in General Discussions [original thread]
Meeko Fent wrote: Sir Dukey wrote: If a thread is made about abolishing 1.7 and has 30 signatures, 1.7 will be abolished. 1.7 is making tanks a bigger sp sink and nerfing tanks into the groud to a point where they have to retreat to the red ...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 04:58:00
|
3754. 1.7 Missile tanks: 12 round clip and .15s fire interval, will make large missile... - in General Discussions [original thread]
Last I remember, CCP said the vehicle change was being pushed to after 1.7. Are these missile changes confirmed? How much of the stats I saw on their spreadsheet are placeholder, and what's confirmed? Is there a list of changes to compare current...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 03:35:00
|
3755. Announcement:Vehicle Changes and Beyond - Part 2 - in General Discussions [original thread]
Anoko Destrolock wrote: The most important thing is to make tanks cheaper. The biggest frustration with tanking is when you lose 1, you know itll take a ton of games in militia fits to pay for it. If tanks are cheaper in the future and more su...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 03:25:00
|
3756. Partial respect with 1.6? - in General Discussions [original thread]
KalOfTheRathi wrote: Needless Sacermendor wrote: -- snip -- I burned through 120 mil isk at the same time cos the Amarr Logistics suit didn't work at anything but proto level. But I brought it up on the forums n they fixed it ... people hav...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 03:13:00
|
3757. Partial respect with 1.6? - in General Discussions [original thread]
Joel II X wrote: I think everyone should get only one respec. That way, nobody will QQ. I'm still with my first character I ever created and effed around with the skills. That means I have some skills allocated where I now know I won't ever use...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 03:12:00
|
3758. Partial respect with 1.6? - in General Discussions [original thread]
Needless Sacermendor wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: I went logistics dropship pilot for PC matches full bore with Uprising, then had a legitimate anxiety attack after two weeks of doing everything I possibly could to make them work and burning thr...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 03:11:00
|
3759. Partial respect with 1.6? - in General Discussions [original thread]
KING CHECKMATE wrote: Spkr4theDead wrote: Thurak1 wrote: CharCharOdell wrote: f**k no! only tankers get respecs! Ha! why are tankers so special? Dropsuits are in a very similar situation where a vast majority of the content they plan...
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 03:06:00
|
3760. Partial respect with 1.6? - in General Discussions [original thread]
Jack McReady wrote: Master Jaraiya wrote: SgtDoughnut wrote: Kasote Denzara wrote: Urrrgh. There should only be refunds, not respecs. When they remove something, you get all the SP and ISK back. That's it and all there should ever be....
- by Spkr4theDead - at 2013.10.16 03:06:00
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |