These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: 2006-03-03 20:00
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-09-06 12:07
  • Number of Posts: 93
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 48

M1AU

Security Status 3.3
  • The Scope Member since
  • Gallente Federation Faction

Last 20 Posts

  • Dev Blog: DirectX 11 - What To Expect in EVE Information Center

    Too bad I didn't read OpenGL there. Would love to see that in the future, especially since SteamOS is coming along which might be my favorite gaming OS in the future. Just don't rest on there and move over to some serious multi platform. Seriously that could come in handy at some point!

  • Dev blog: License to kill: Certificates Overhaul in EVE Information Center

    Throughout good changes. Well done!

  • Steam OS, are you excited, beacuse I'm excited! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I'm also very excited about this!
    Valve is a real big player nowadays and the new SteamOS looks very promising. Though I don't see CCP jumping on it right after the release of the first SteamBox, how could they after spending the last decade of developing the client on and around the Windows platform?
    Though I remember reading a few years ago that Linux is not out of sight and they'll probably address that in the future.
    Valve's SteamOS will of course be a Linux based OS optimized for gaming, that changes quite a lot IMO and could bring EVE back in a few years.
    Only time will tell, I at least would love to play it on SteamOS!

  • New dev blog: Unified inventory in EVE Information Center

    Pure awesomeness! I waited for this so long.

  • New dev blog: Crucible 1.1 and Soundwave's Animal Safety Advice in EVE Information Center

    Can we get autocompletion also in the market search bar? Pretty please? <3

  • Huge UI Mistake in the New Neocom in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I support the op in this matter. There should at least be a few pixel space between the undock button and the opening ship hangar button. And yes, it really matters.

  • New dev blog: Remember the old new Neocom? in EVE Information Center

    CCP Optimal wrote:
    Destination SkillQueue wrote:
    It sounds all good with one exception. That being:
    Quote:
    We’ve also changed the toggle-close window behavior of the Neocom buttons to toggle-minimize.


    This sounds like a downgrade in functionality for me personally. I almost never minimize those windows, while on the other hand I open and close neocom windows all the time. I guess I can work around it by binding shortcuts to both close and minimize functions and just use those, but I still wish you wouldn't change it from how it functions today. Just a personal preference though.


    The argument here is that when you open up a window that is not already pinned to the Neocom, the toggle close functionality can become very annoying. If you for example want to keep an agent mission window open for the duration of a mission, you could quite easily close the window by accident with the toggle close functionality, but with toggle minimize you won't lose the window as easily through clumsy clicking. Also, for windows that are already pinned to the Neocom, you don't really care too much if the window is closed or minimized, as long as it pops in your face when you click the button. This also results in the nice side effect that windows generally take much less time to maximize than to open. As with all new functionality, this will of course take a little bit of getting used to.


    That's a good point. Though it should therefor get easier to close windows. I for one would like to have the close button of windows 1. always visible and 2. in the top left corner.

  • New dev blog: Remember the old new Neocom? in EVE Information Center

    Way to go CCP. Every new UI is better than the current one. Thanks.

  • Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Nikuno wrote:
    Another week or so gone, new figures;

    1 Maelstrom 57868
    2 Drake 42169
    3 Hurricane 34209
    4 Tengu 25683
    5 Abaddon 23004
    6 Tornado 14330
    7 Tempest 11939
    8 Scimitar 10217
    9 Sabre 8760
    10 Armageddon 7463
    11 Zealot 6618
    12 Huginn 6565
    13 Cynabal 6272
    14 Manticore 6188
    15 Scorpion 6167
    16 Hound 6041
    17 Rapier 5998
    18 Vagabond 5694
    19 Nyx 5659
    20 Oracle 5401


    1 Heavy Missile Launcher II 23039
    2 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II 15437
    3 425mm AutoCannon II 11905
    4 Mega Pulse Laser II 9333
    5 200mm AutoCannon II 6178
    6 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II 5194
    7 150mm Light AutoCannon II 5142
    8 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II 4900
    9 720mm Howitzer Artillery II 4604
    10 800mm Repeating Artillery II 4417
    11 Heavy Pulse Laser II 3508
    12 1400mm Gallium Cannon 3371
    13 'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher 3283
    14 1400mm Prototype Siege Cannon 3101
    15 425mm Railgun II 1866
    16 Light Neutron Blaster II 1799
    17 Citadel Torpedo Launcher I 1653
    18 Ion Siege Blaster Cannon I 1563
    19 Neutron Blaster Cannon II 1552
    20 Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I 1527

    No hybrid using ships, 5.9% of weapons are hybrids. Still dreadful.


    Didn't know so many Nyx SCs blowing up nowadays huh? Or should that be Onyx?
    Edit: or are those numbers final blows?

  • Assault Ships - 4th Bonus and Retribution Fix in EVE Technology and Research Center

    There are some good and easy to implement proposals in the Ops post, keep it up.

  • Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets in EVE Technology and Research Center

    tEcHnOkRaT wrote:
    Fon Revedhort wrote:
    Pinky Denmark wrote:

    And how can you claim active tanking is fine when Brutix, cyclone, sleipnir, claymore with shield bonuses rarely use active tanking? Myrmidons and Hyperions shield tank as often as they active tank where Im flying too and I'd rather fit an extender on a Hawk rather than even a faction shield booster...

    That's why I'm saying buffer tanking is way too good for its cost (there's none actually) and its drawbacks (very insignificant). Fix buffer and active tanking will turn out much more viable.

    Matari speed is a whole another story.


    myrmidon and hyperion is being used for pve and in pve active shield tank is twice as good as active armor tank. and u cant buffer tank in pve cuz u will pop :).
    and as for passive shield tank in pve there is only a handfull that u can consider viable.

    so u are now flaming about passive shield tanks in pvp, but just consider that there are alot more solo pve players then active pvp players. and if u change the way shield tanking works for alot of people lvl 4 and lvl 5 missions might become imposible to complete.

    another option would be to boost active armor tanking

    btw this forum is for hybrid guns not for shield/armor tanking :)


    Well I'm doing quite a few lvl 4's in empire space but I rather see NPCs getting balanced around different weapon systems and tanks, so that not a single weapon system or tank is preferable against pretty much all of them.
    If it makes sense to change the way how active armor or shield tanks work in a PVP environment, do it.

  • Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I just wanted to point out, that besides a webifier bonus, being the fastest race in the game or making you the most tankable race in the game, there still is the already mentioned alternative of a short speed boost module of some sort.

    I can't give you any numbers or how it should be implemented exactly, but given the possibility of getting up close in a short period of time, without making you the fastest race in the game doesn't leave much else left.

  • Let's Improve T1 Cruisers! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Meditril wrote:
    No, no, please stop the DPS contest... everyone just wants DPS increased on every ship. Stop that, please!
    Please try to think out of the box, what the game need is more tactical and strategic choices, this is exectly the opposite of "gimme more DPS" its more about unique features for different ships like e-war etc. Please come with interesting new and unique ideas for improving ships and for creation of new roles for ships.

    In my opinion there are already some interesting roles in the game, but as the OP said correctly, there are a few T1 ships which can not handle the supposed role (like remote repair role and the like) accordingly. So take these existing roles and work on top of them. I would start with T1 logistics ships, because logistics is a very strategic and also very interesting role to play.

  • Let's Improve T1 Cruisers! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Jan'tor wrote:
    Hi! I am a newbie and I enjoy flying T1 cruisers in fleets while training support skills, but most of them seem to be terrible and more experienced players tell me that of the 16 T1 cruisers available, only about 5 of them are worth using. T1 support cruisers and electronics cruisers in particular seem to need some help. I'm interested in flying logistics, but there is no introductory ship for me to practice with. I'm interested in ewar, but I had to crosstrain caldari in order to be able to fly a worthwhile electronics cruiser.

    Ideally, all T1 cruisers should have some use in pvp. T1 cruisers should be about giving newbies a cheap, low-skill platform in order to try out various playstyles and figure out which T2 ships they want to train for, rather than having to train all the way to Logi V just to see if they like it.

    I also honestly think that a viable way of going the support career from the early beginning would help the game a lot!
    making T1 cruiser more balanced towards there T2 counterpart is a good way to start that.

  • EVE Online: Crucible Trailer is now available in HD! in EVE Communication Center

    Cool!

  • CCP i warned you about the font! in EVE Communication Center

    I like the new font, please don't revert to the unreadable one.
    But of course, there's always room for improvements, so the devs should take note and improve upon the new implemented fonts.

  • EVE Online: Crucible Deployment Information in EVE Information Center

    Alara IonStorm wrote:
    M1AU wrote:

    Shorthand was never a subject of my question.

    This Web of Questions is getting tangled up in my Heavily Sleep Deprived Brain.

    The Omnidirectional tracking link is a Drone Tracking Computer. There is a T1 version in game. They are releasing a T2 version in this expansion with better stats.

    The Drone Navigation Computer which increases drone Speed has a T1 version in-game by the looks of it a T2 version is not being released in this expansion.

    Does that cover it?


    Well I'm still confused why's there a Omnidirectional Tracking Link _and_ a Drone Tracking Computer on that list. Doesn't makes much sense for me... Nevertheless, just wanted to point that out.

  • EVE Online: Crucible Deployment Information in EVE Information Center

    Alara IonStorm wrote:
    M1AU wrote:

    So why is the module listed in the patch notes?

    What does that have to do with shorthand?


    Shorthand was never a subject of my question.

  • EVE Online: Crucible Deployment Information in EVE Information Center

    Alara IonStorm wrote:
    M1AU wrote:
    Alara IonStorm wrote:
    M1AU wrote:
    Is there already a Drone tracking computer I ingame? I though it is called Drone navigation computer?

    Drone Tracking Comp increase Range and Tracking. The Navigation Comp increases MWD and Speed by 30%.

    They are 2 different modules.


    Wait, isn't that what the Omnidirectional Tracking Link is for?

    Drone Tracking Comp is Shorthand for the OTL.


    Quote:
    Modules

    The following Tech II modules have been added and will only be available through Invention. No Tech II BPO’s will be created for these items:
    Warfare link II
    Mining Foreman link II
    Core probe launcher II
    Drone link augmentor II
    Omnidirectional tracking link II
    Drone tracking computer II
    Siege module II
    Triage module II
    Small remote hull repair system II
    Medium remote hull repair system II
    Large remote hull repair system II
    Bomb launcher II
    Micro auxiliary power core II
    Small tractor beam II
    Capital tractor beam II
    Warp disruption field generator II

    So why is the module listed in the patch notes?

  • EVE Online: Crucible Deployment Information in EVE Information Center

    Alara IonStorm wrote:
    M1AU wrote:
    Is there already a Drone tracking computer I ingame? I though it is called Drone navigation computer?

    Drone Tracking Comp increase Range and Tracking. The Navigation Comp increases MWD and Speed by 30%.

    They are 2 different modules.


    Wait, isn't that what the Omnidirectional Tracking Link is for?