EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2006-11-03 02:23
  • First Forum Visit: 2014-05-12 15:30
  • Number of Posts: 2,667
  • Bounty: 10,000,000 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Bronson Hughes

Security Status 0.1
  • The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • New Forums = New C&P in EVE Gameplay Center

    Saeger1737 wrote:
    Bronson Hughes wrote:
    Looks like I picked the wrong day to start reading the forums again....

    Where is my pie?

    Came expecting some sort of "Shirley" reply.

    Am deeply disappointed.

    What a pisser.

  • KR Bug? in EVE Gameplay Center

    I don't know if this qualifies as a bug, but I do know that the killright status of ships in space does not update immediately. Many times hanging around a station, I would pop a cheap killright, kill the pilot, and when they undocked 15 minutes later, no longer suspect, the old kill right shows as still available. However, when you go to pop that one, you get a little UI box that says something to the effect of "Kill right is no longer available." A few minutes later, the killright would disappear on its own with no action on my part.

    I've seen the same thing where a killright that shows up as free jumps in price once I actually try to activate it and I suspect that it's the same issue: something in-game updating more slowly than our twitchy kill fingers.

    Side note: Any time you're playing Killright games, limit the amount of ISK in your wallet to 100mil or so, and keep the rest either on an alt or in a corp wallet. It's a fabulous firewall against massive killrights.

  • New Forums = New C&P in EVE Gameplay Center

    Looks like I picked the wrong day to start reading the forums again....

  • Tama/Nourvukaiken Anti-Gatecamp Op in EVE Gameplay Center

    Dabasir wrote:
    ...evil gate campers...


    Gate camps may be some of the least creative and most boring form gameplay in all of EvE, often resulting for equal amounts of frustration for both those participating in one and those unfortunate enough to stumble upon one, but the mere act of camping a gate does not make one evil.

    -1 for misrepresenting gate camping.

    +1 for gumption.

    Overall rating: meh.

  • Strategic Cruiser Focus Group Working Thread in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Dior Ambraelle wrote:
    Among the Caldari cruisers, only the Navy Caracal, Eagle and Onyx have no drone bays. The Zealot (Amarr), Phobos (Gallente) and Broadsword (Minmatar) also lacks drones.
    Interestingly, literally half of the ships I listed here are HICs.

    I think all cruisers should have room and be able to use at least 2 small utility drones, and this includes all possible variations of the T3Cs too.

    No ship should automatically just get a drone bay because of its size or cost. The drone bay should also fit with the ship's role.

    Just needing "a little extra utility" in what is arguably the most flexible class of ships in the game is not a valid justification.

  • The Devil's Warrior Alliance - HS Merc Alliance in EVE Gameplay Center

    Saeger1737 wrote:
    Omar Alharazaad wrote:
    Bronson Hughes wrote:
    Omar Alharazaad wrote:
    ...banana hammock...

    I may need more bourbon....

    Never not more bourbon....
    unless you're driving a marauder during wartime and find yourself looking at an enemy POS... thinking to youself 'I'm totally gonna have sex with that.'
    Then, you might wanna think about stepping back.
    Never go full Omar.

    BRO that's when you spawn exotic dancers and setup a strip show around that pos pole...bet Ralph would make it rain on you.

    This thread delivers.

  • Strategic Cruiser Focus Group Working Thread in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Omnathious Deninard wrote:
    In the current iteration of the subsystems the nullified sub has one less slot, and the covert ops sub has less raw hp.
    In order to maintain exploration viability they cannot be glass cannons.
    As Jeremiah stated, the best way to catch an explorer is in the site.

    I have no issue with non-nullified CovOps fits being tanky enough for exploration sites and I think that the active tank bonus on the current round of CovOps subsystems suits this role well. However, nullified CovOps isn't a requirement for exploration, only CovOps is, and it's this specific combination that I think needs to be reigned in.

    Keep in mind that if CCP is in the process of re-working all of the subsystems, there's nothing stopping them from applying EHP penalties to the nullification subsystem even though it's not in the Defense category.

  • Strategic Cruiser Focus Group Working Thread in EVE Technology and Research Center

    baltec1 wrote:
    Third, for me, is that cov ops cloaks and nullification on any ship should not be allowed. on a cruiser sized hull it just means it is impossible to stop such a ship. People will try to push keeping it because it "impacts exploration" but quite frankly I don't see why people running around making isk via probing should be given this tool to simply ignore PvP. Getting through a blockade should involve some skill on the pilots behalf.

    Lastly I would look at reducing the size of the sub systems from 40 m3 down to 10 m3 and bumping up the cargo hold to 450 m3. That should give you the room needed for refits, ammo, charges and such so that they can be the highly adaptable cruisers you can adapt on the fly.

    I pretty well agree with all of your other points, but let me address these.

    I am okay with the notion of CovOps and nullification being on the same hull at the same time, but I feel like making that choice should carry considerably steeper penalties than it does now, or will according to the WIP sheet. Maybe combine your two ideas: make most subsystems smaller, but make the nullification and/or CovOps subsystems bigger. A lot bigger. That way pilots will have a harder time refitting into, or out of, a nullified CovOps configuration in space. Force pilots to stick to their less-capable fit if they want the benefits of nullified CovOps.

    Without knowing the final stats yet, I'd also consider further reducing the durability and/or mobility of a nullified CovOps fit. Make them more like bombers: slow, fat, glass cannons.

  • The Devil's Warrior Alliance - HS Merc Alliance in EVE Gameplay Center

    Omar Alharazaad wrote:
    ...banana hammock...

    I may need more bourbon....

  • [June] Nullsec Asteroid Cluster and Excavator Drone changes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    ISD Max Trix wrote:

    Because anything I say will be taking as the Gospel of CCP.

    Tissues are 5 isk.

    At the risk of commenting on moderation...this post warmed my heart. Smile

  • [Summer] RLML and HML balance pass in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Super Chair wrote:
    ...the actual choice should ideally be between HAMs (do i want to brawl with high dps and mid-high application?) , HMLs (Do I want long range with pretty good dps and mid application? (Mid application being that it applies to a cruiser just fine) or Rapid Lights (Do I want really good application at the cost of range and some dps? *Hint* this should be lower than HMLs).

    Quoting for emphasis.

    If you want cruisers to use heavy missiles, you need to make them worth using at least some of the time. These changes are steps in the right direction, but they're not enough. I hope that this change is just a first step in the balance process.

  • Crime and NO punishment in EVE Gameplay Center

    Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
    We need to start taxing salt producers...


    New corp/alliance application question #1:

    Are they worth their salt?

  • Asset transfer mechanic . Ccp please fix in EVE Gameplay Center

    Just to make sure I understand you, you're claiming that Marmite put up a structure in a wormhole and transferred ownership of said structure to VMG without VMG leadership's consent, presumably with the intention of killing said structure?

  • Setting up base in lowsec in EVE Gameplay Center

    DeLoad wrote:
    Thank you.. not sure what the deal is with all that but

    You did ask a question in Crime & Punishment. If you wanted assistance without the flavor, you may have wanted to check in Warfare & Tactics.

    Check DOTLAN to find areas that meet your requirements. It can be a bit tedious if you have a lot of requirements, but it's the best tool available. Cross-check with killboards and/or forum posts and you should be golden.

  • Strategic Cruiser Focus Group Working Thread in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Harvey James wrote:
    tengu should have the kinetic damage removed .. versatility and all and just leave the Rof and velocity bonus..

    Interesting point on the kinetic lock and versatility. I suspect that a lot of folks would gladly trade some raw kinetic DPS for lower-but-any-damage-type DPS, and this would be in line with the whole notion of T3 flexibility.

  • Strategic Cruiser Focus Group Working Thread in EVE Technology and Research Center

    General thoughts:

    1. I like the move to replace the old engineering and electronics subsystems with the core subsystems. It seems like all of the old bonuses have been kept, just in a more manageable format.

    2. I also like the move to combine the covert and probing subsystems into a single subsystem.

    3. One beef that I have always had with T3s is their rigs. They're already the most customizable ships in the game, so why do they get three rig slots and 400 calibration? T2 ships only get two slots and Pirate ships get 350 calibration. I really feel that T3s should have less rig capability than T2/Pirate ships, not more, especially if they gain the ability to swap rigs.

    4. I like the increased focus on overheat-related bonuses. Should make for some really interesting gameplay.

  • The Ultimate Guide to Defeating CODE in EVE Gameplay Center

    Omar Alharazaad wrote:
    When I mined I found that D-Scan plus paying attention to local was the best tank.
    Also, actually mining aligned really does work.
    Didn't they add those spiffy Higgs rigs or whatever to slow down the ship?
    With those you can slowboat across the belt and just keep nomming on the next rock to come into range.
    Something spooky approaching? Cool, already aligned to safe... so poof I'mma gone before whatever lands.
    But, you know, effort.
    Much better to cry, saber rattle and come up with goofy fits that wont save you anyways.

    The best tanks are ALWAYS active tanks.

    As in, player active and at the keyboard.

  • The Ultimate Guide to Defeating CODE in EVE Gameplay Center

    Hiasa Kite wrote:
    Alessienne Ellecon wrote:
    But in most cases, the ECM proc can blast interference at two ships at once,

    One. In most cases it'll drop one. 1.2, to be precise (based on 30% jam possibility).

    Quote:
    giving a greater change of a hit. In the event that the cycles fail, the shield tank is there to buy some time until the cycles succeed.

    Ganks take at most, 24 seconds. ECM cycles are 20 seconds. You won't get another cycle.

    Hiasa is spot on here.

    Math. It's what drives EvE mechanics. Ignore it at your own peril.

  • [1V1] The Challenge (Dom vs Yaosus) - Dom Arkaral backed out in EVE Gameplay Center

    Mike Adoulin wrote:
    Bah.

    Real men duel in billion-ISK Ventures.

    Cool

    Pfft.

    Billion-ISK pods.

    It's no longer a test of piloting skills, it's a test of "which one of you can pay off someone to kill a pod faster" skills. More of a duel of C&P skills if you will. Skullduggery, subterfuge, strategy, that sort of thing.

    Bonus point for someone smartbombing both contestants.

  • [1V1] The Challenge (Dom vs Yaosus) - Dom Arkaral backed out in EVE Gameplay Center

    You guys.

    *sigh*

    You guys make it so hard for me to stay away. But...sadly my only contribution to this shall be my popcorn crumbs and wistful sighs.

    /popcorn

Forum Signature

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs