These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Two modules that can revolutionize Eve
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Elmund Egivand
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2017-05-18 10:13:55 UTC
I prefer a module where we can pod someone while he is in station. Like a high precision shield-piercing railgun or something.

Because someone needs to give the 0.01 isk traders the what-for. With ship-grade munitions.

A Minmatar warship is like a rusting Beetle with 500 horsepower Cardillac engines in the rear, armour plating bolted to chassis and a M2 Browning stuck on top.
Magnus Jax
#22 - 2017-05-18 10:22:14 UTC
OP is under the impression that if they would increase the amount of drones they wouldn't touch the dps per drone and leave it as is, massively increasing drone dps. OP doesn't understand balancing.
Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#23 - 2017-05-18 10:28:11 UTC
How about an Eve revolution that would remove combat drones completely from the gameplay?

Twisted

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
Cherry Sulphate
ojingo
#24 - 2017-05-18 11:05:17 UTC
OP did you come up with these ideas before or after the teacher took the colouring book off you?
HydrogenBond Shaishi
C-H-C
#25 - 2017-05-19 02:43:41 UTC
Cherry Sulphate wrote:
OP did you come up with these ideas before or after the teacher took the colouring book off you?


Both before and after.
HydrogenBond Shaishi
C-H-C
#26 - 2017-05-19 02:47:01 UTC
Magnus Jax wrote:
OP is under the impression that if they would increase the amount of drones they wouldn't touch the dps per drone and leave it as is, massively increasing drone dps. OP doesn't understand balancing.



My thinking is CPP would boost the amount of DPS needed to crack PvE ships by raising resists.
HydrogenBond Shaishi
C-H-C
#27 - 2017-05-19 03:00:48 UTC
Sir BloodArgon Aulmais wrote:
I stop taking any argument/suggestion seriously once the phrase "common guys its [The current year] why dont we have X!"


I can't believe its the current year and people are still coming up with bad ideas like this.


I was referring to its year 33000 and we get a 2003 construct?
Previous page12