These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2010-09-16 20:07
  • First Forum Visit: 2012-05-29 06:17
  • Number of Posts: 889
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Caitlyn Tufy

Security Status 5.0
  • Perkone Member since
  • Caldari State Faction

Last 20 Posts

  • so this is there real future for new players? gate camp? in EVE Communication Center

    Neuntausend wrote:
    He's flown into Tama, of all places. He has done that twice - that can still be considered part of the learning process. If it happens a third time, and he still doesn't start thinking about what he may be doing wrong, that's where I would start worrying.


    Challenge accepted? :)

  • what is the plural of "orthrus"? in EVE Gameplay Center

    Adrie Atticus wrote:
    Orthr.

    Edit: from a Latin lexicon, not made up. Yes, really.


    Except it's a greek beast and unique at that. As Gorn said, above, Orthruses would be the most logical plural.

  • Ship Insurance Idea in EVE Gameplay Center

    Garviel Tarrant wrote:
    If you need insurance to get into fleets you're terrible.


    Not get into fleets. Get PEOPLE into fleets.

  • Ship Insurance Idea in EVE Gameplay Center

    Daniel Plain wrote:
    Quote:
    Daniel Plain wrote:
    i have a better idea: remove insurance from the game.


    Insurance pays off for T1 ships, making them relatively cheap to fly compared to more expensive options - this means they're not completely obsolete even when the pilot can fly others ships about.


    in other words, insurance prevents people from flying the ships they would prefer to fly.


    No, insurance gets people into fleets. If there was none, you would't have a third of the fights you have today.

  • Ship Insurance Idea in EVE Gameplay Center

    IIshira wrote:
    Insurance isn't meant to make it risk free.

    I have an idea... How about making insurance based on your flying record. If you're terrible and lose many ships insurance would be expensive


    I can afford to lose a hundred ships and still fly about. I am also more likely to survive, since I've spent years in this game. Meanwhile, a new pilot will not have much isk and is also more likely to lose ships to harmless mistakes. There's a reason best insurance is given for T1 ships.

    Daniel Plain wrote:
    i have a better idea: remove insurance from the game.


    Insurance pays off for T1 ships, making them relatively cheap to fly compared to more expensive options - this means they're not completely obsolete even when the pilot can fly others ships about.

  • A duel of honour (Drake Vs. Drake) in EVE Gameplay Center

    DHuncan wrote:
    Caitlyn Tufy wrote:
    Bring friends. And stop trying to be honorable, it'll only get you killed.


    That would espoil the enjoyment in the case I win. It would give him the excuse to diminish my deed.


    Let him diminish it, he'd still have lost a ship. Frankly, I'd go for the pod too, just to bring insult to injury.

  • A duel of honour (Drake Vs. Drake) in EVE Gameplay Center

    Bring friends. And stop trying to be honorable, it'll only get you killed.

  • So for pve Missile caldari are the win? :X in EVE Gameplay Center

    Mund Richard wrote:
    Missiles do fix damage that cannot be higher than the stated for a missile, get their damage ALWAYS reduced by signature if it's smaller than the Explosion Radius of your Missiles, get always reduced by speed (if it's higher than the exp velo), thus they are best at rats already orbiting you (their orbiting velocity is only half that of their approaching).


    One tiny correction here - you can compensate for explosion velocity by explosion radius. This means that even if your missile's explosion velocity is very low, you may still apply full damage to a ship moving fast, provided your explosion radius is good.

  • Viability of the Barghest for Incursions? in EVE Gameplay Center

    IIshira wrote:
    The Raven has a velocity bonus (Debatable if this helps). This Barghest doesn't even have this.


    I am sorry - what? The Barghest has the highest velocity bonus in game (at the expense of flight time duration), plus highest missile alpha in game. The problem is small drone bay and no damage application bonus.

  • [Kronos] The New Eden Store in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Abulurd Boniface wrote:
    That's the shopping cart idea. That's actually patented, somebody is going to sue CCP over use of that technology. No more free updates for us. We can't have that.


    Not anymore. Soverain was stopped by Supreme Court earlier this year, the only thing patented now is Amazon's 1-Click.

  • Autocannons have the worst projection now. in EVE Gameplay Center

    Deerin wrote:
    Still, one would expect AC's to be slightly better at projection (being a PROJECTile weapon).


    Projectile weapons have nothing to do with projection - their name simply implies the use of actual physical slugs (projectiles) - as opposed to energy weapons, which have no physical slug.

    Imo atm the AC damage might be a bit too low across the board, but not in any particular field. Parud above came the closest - TE nerf hit them hard - some would say a bit too hard.

  • [Kronos] Medium Micro Jump Drives in EVE Technology and Research Center

    This is a very, very, VERY bad idea. Just give DSTs the ability to use Large MJD and that's it.

  • Need a L4 ship for poors in EVE Gameplay Center

    Quote:
    3rd Tier
    Tempest
    Scorpion
    Anything Amarr (because of damage type, you will need a second ship depending on NPC Resists)
    Rokh


    Lasers are just as limiting in damage type as hybrids are, but their raw power can often offset part of the damage loss. An Apocalypse will do just fine in most cases (I consider it superior to Maelstrom), though it's sometimes a better idea to use beams than pulses (more TH damage on short range ammo against EM resist heavy targets).

  • [Kronos] Mordu's Legion in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Iam Widdershins wrote:
    Chris Winter wrote:
    The Barghest starts to look really lackluster when compared to the other pirate BSes.

    BARGHEST: 8.75 effective launchers (at max skill), 50m3 drones, 20 total slots.
    NIGHTMARE: 10 effective guns (at any skill), 75m3 drones, 19 total slots.
    BHAALGORN: 8 effective guns (at any skill), 100m3 drones, 19 total slots.
    RATTLESNAKE: 7.5 effective launchers (at max skill, kin/therm only), 125m3 bonused drones, 19 total slots.
    VINDICATOR: 11 effective guns (at any skill), 125m3 drones, 20 total slots.
    MACHARIAL: 11.7 effective guns (at max skill), 100m3 drones, 20 total slots.

    Most direct comparison seems to be the vindicator or the macharial, at 20 slots.

    So why does the Barghest lag behind both of them in both effective launchers AND drone bandwidth? What's the deal here?

    On an unrelated note, why do the nightmare/bhaalgorn only get 19 slots...

    Nightmare and Bhaalgorn get 19 slots because their guns are inherently doubled. That's simple.

    I definitely agree with your assessment otherwise, though. Barghest is sorely in need of a 10%/lvl damage bonus, if not better.


    Missile ships always had a lower number of "effective launchers". That made missile ships generally inferior in dps before the cruises were buffed, as each individual launcher was roughly compareable to individual gun. However, since they were buffed, the raw power of a cruise missile is considerably higher that that of a gun. An 8.75 launcher Barghest will be more than a match for an 11.7 gun Mach in combat. Of course, gunships still have the advantage of blaping a frig, something a missile ship will never do.

  • [T3 cruiser rebalance] 1 rig per subsytem instead of the 'hull' in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Jezza McWaffle wrote:
    I'd rather they just buff all the sub systems and get rid of rigs all together.


    This.

    Crazy KSK wrote:
    but the technical hurdle will make it impossible since the fitting window can't even display 10 rigs and making each subsystem its own ship or something would probably be a lot of work


    "Technical hurdle" is a term describing laziness and lack of imagination. Where there's a will (and knowledge), there's a way.

  • [Kronos] Pirate Faction Battleships in EVE Technology and Research Center

    If any of you feel the Geckos are useless, I will gladly trade them for normal T2 heavies of your choice on a 2:1 basis (2 T2 heavies per Gecko).

  • [Fanfest 2014] Moa, Condor, Typhoon (and now Diminix) redesigned. in EVE Gameplay Center

    Tyberius Franklin wrote:
    Caitlyn Tufy wrote:
    Symmetry in space is a very funny thing. Take your star destroyer for instance. If you look at it from the 2D perspective, it may seem symmetrical, but since space is a 3D environment, flip it 90 degrees to the side and try to find symmetry. Kinda not there anymore, is it?

    By that same standard the new Moa isn't symmetrical, so how does that logic not circulate back around preempting the argument here?


    I'm not trying to argue for the beauty of symmetry or asymmetry, I am simply pointing out that symmetry in 3d space is a peculiar thing and from the point of visual perception a very limiting one, bound by our own expectations and experiences with a fixed surface. Or to rephrase it, while on the planet fluids dictate the shape of an object, in space it's purely a question of mass distribution relative to the propulsion and the strength of materials used. A spaceship may look like a plane, a ball or a scrapyard challenge - it doesn't matter, as long as it performs its duties.

    That said, the question of design is always a broad one and one that does not have one answer. To me, the "new" Scorpion, Stabby or Moa are amazing while to someone else, they're abominations. Frankly, I don't care, as long as the model fits with the general theme of the race. For caldari that's highly utilitarian and military-minded, almost spartan-like. I feel that the new Moa expresses this design very well. That's all there is to it.

  • [Fanfest 2014] Moa, Condor, Typhoon (and now Diminix) redesigned. in EVE Gameplay Center

    Enison wrote:
    idk why people are bitching about loving asymmetry. i never fly most caldari ships if i can help it. their ships do not look like space ships to me because theyre not symmetrical. they look like badly made kids toys. ships like the rohk are spaceships to me. they have that long look that makes them look like a spaceship. not some hideous ship with different pieces jutting out all over the place. what kinda structural integrity can that offer? yea yea theyre shield ships, but hull strength still has to play a part.

    http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120302053031/starwars/images/a/a8/ImpStarDestroyer-SWI125.jpg

    http://www.dvice.com/sites/dvice/files/images/pics/Battlestar-Galactica-ship.jpg


    http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090714124528/firefly/images/1/11/Firefly_class_ship.jpg

    and im sure there are many more i cant think of.

    even the most famous asymmetrical ship of all time is mostly symmetrical.

    https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSSf7_Qc_ZhIJmmnNXZ_aO1W5TlAcdfAuSrAVuWSR5XWGBWtngmrw



    Symmetry in space is a very funny thing. Take your star destroyer for instance. If you look at it from the 2D perspective, it may seem symmetrical, but since space is a 3D environment, flip it 90 degrees to the side and try to find symmetry. Kinda not there anymore, is it?

  • What is currently happening on Earth? in EVE Communication Center

    Webvan wrote:
    James Amril-Kesh wrote:

    That episode was okay.
    It was monumentally better than the season following it.
    Oh pfff I don't even have that last season in my DVD collection. Even Excalibur was better, at least the Galen episodes. imo after S4, they should have flashed back to either the Minbari war or to B4 after it went back, at least for a season.


    That's because it wasn't ment to be. B5 was first supposed to have 5 seasons and the story considerably different (long story short, Sinclair would have led the war against shadows, THEN go back to the last war). O'Hare (Sinclair) was replaced with Boxleitner (Sheridan) and the whole "The One who was, the One who is and the One who will be" was invented. Then the series was supposed to end with season 4, that's why the Shadow War and Earth Conflict are resolved and we get "The Deconstruction of Falling Stars", an epilogue to the series - but then it was extended by another season, which didn't tie in to the original story at all.

    Still, B5 has one of the best thought out overall story arcs to date, imo - it definitely takes the second place with my most popular sci-fi shows.


    As for Earth - I hope we never find a way back to it. We should be able to figure out what the hell happened with EVE through clues and hints littering the New Eden, but we should never face Terrans or find out about their fate.

  • [Fanfest 2014] Moa, Condor, Typhoon (and now Diminix) redesigned. in EVE Gameplay Center

    Boomtown Jones wrote:
    All four redesigns are excellent, particularly the battleships, and the Dominix most of all. Those drone bays, that vintage warp spool, I may never need another ship.

    Updating eye-catching, iconic ships like the Dominix and the typhoon changes the whole landscape of EVE for everyone. It makes me wonder what battleship should be next for a respectful reboot?


    Maelstrom. Though, to be honest, it's not as bad as some other ships (I'm looking at you, Blackbird).