| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Godin Thekiller
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
3005
   |
Posted - 2015.03.25 22:09:00 -
[1] - Quote
If so, would you think it would be a good idea to have The Marauders have +1 slot to their defense rack, and -1 to their non defense rack?
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Alena Ventrallis
Ahrendee Inc.
Negative-Feedback
2814
|
Posted - 2015.03.25 23:10:00 -
[2] - Quote
I believe 5 is hard coded as the max. Although our could simply addadd an off slot and still have enough room.
Listen to my muscle memory
Contemplate what I've been clinging to
Forty-six and two ahead of me
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5586
|
Posted - 2015.03.25 23:16:00 -
[3] - Quote
it would require a UI update on a pretty large scale and likely a significant change on the backend as well. Besides Rattati's plan is to have the specialist HAVs have less slots than the generic ones, similar to how the ADS has less slots than the generic dropship. Bonuses will compensate for the lack of slots + some in order to remove flexibility in the fit but still make the vehicle significantly stronger in a specific way.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Godin Thekiller
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
3005
|
Posted - 2015.03.25 23:38:00 -
[4] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:it would require a UI update on a pretty large scale and likely a significant change on the backend as well. Besides Rattati's plan is to have the specialist HAVs have less slots than the generic ones, similar to how the ADS has less slots than the generic dropship. Bonuses will compensate for the lack of slots + some in order to remove flexibility in the fit but still make the vehicle significantly stronger in a specific way.
What I was thinking is to have Marauders focus more so on the main tank rack, less so on the utility rack, and therefore would give up on the utility rack. Seeing as they would have less slots, minus 1 to the utility rack?
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
5586
|
Posted - 2015.03.25 23:41:00 -
[5] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:it would require a UI update on a pretty large scale and likely a significant change on the backend as well. Besides Rattati's plan is to have the specialist HAVs have less slots than the generic ones, similar to how the ADS has less slots than the generic dropship. Bonuses will compensate for the lack of slots + some in order to remove flexibility in the fit but still make the vehicle significantly stronger in a specific way. What I was thinking is to have Marauders focus more so on the main tank rack, less so on the utility rack, and therefore would give up on the utility rack. Seeing as they would have less slots, minus 1 to the utility rack?
I get what you're saying but I think Rattati wants a overall decrease in total modules, not a tradeoff between highs and lows. Not saying I agree one way or the other, but it does remain consistent with how ADS and Dropship progression works.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Godin Thekiller
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
3005
|
Posted - 2015.03.26 00:08:00 -
[6] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:it would require a UI update on a pretty large scale and likely a significant change on the backend as well. Besides Rattati's plan is to have the specialist HAVs have less slots than the generic ones, similar to how the ADS has less slots than the generic dropship. Bonuses will compensate for the lack of slots + some in order to remove flexibility in the fit but still make the vehicle significantly stronger in a specific way. What I was thinking is to have Marauders focus more so on the main tank rack, less so on the utility rack, and therefore would give up on the utility rack. Seeing as they would have less slots, minus 1 to the utility rack? I get what you're saying but I think Rattati wants a overall decrease in total modules, not a tradeoff between highs and lows. Not saying I agree one way or the other, but it does remain consistent with how ADS and Dropship progression works.
I don't mind that actually. That's how T II ships are set up anyways. Makes it to where you'd have to focus on one area, not just make a super fit
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Auris Lionesse
Kang Lo Directorate
Gallente Federation
1329
|
Posted - 2015.03.26 00:26:00 -
[7] - Quote
well ideally the limit would be 8 and ive been advocating rebalacing the game to an 8 slot format for over a year.
i will always be an advocate for direct eve parity.
Don't vote for iron wolf saber.
Vote for someone who will help the community i.e. anyone else.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |