EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2012-12-21 03:43
  • First Forum Visit: 2013-02-28 16:26
  • Number of Posts: 8,463
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Lugh Crow-Slave

Security Status -2.5

Last 20 Posts

  • New display setting request: Tactical. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    ... does your laptop meet the minimum specs? I run eve just fun on low settings using a $500 so I'm sure even really cheap ingress can run it at this point

  • Citadel timers - is three strictly neccesary? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    SurrenderMonkey wrote:
    I really like the idea I saw about giving all structures a baseline fuel consumption requirement.

    The suggestion was, they all consume a minimum amount of fuel (say, 10/20/40 per hour for m/l/xl). If unfueled, they lose tethering/timers/whatever.

    The baseline fuel would be shared, up to that minimum amount, with installed services, so it wouldn't actually add to the cost of a structure that's actively being utilized for those - only an otherwise idle structure.



    except fuel was reined for a good reason and proliferation is only a problem in wh space. In k- space any abandoned citadel can be ignored.

    If we really wanted to limit it then do it via a weekly bill this way of they are tied to dead corps/ alliances eventually they will shut down but no one has to be a fuel monkey for currently unused citadel.

  • Citadel timers - is three strictly neccesary? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    The idea behind it was that it would discourage people just randomly going around bashing them like with pos. So you were only going to kill one of you really had a reason. This lets them be safe enough to be placed in space publicly and used over stations

  • Country Patch in EVE Technology and Research Center

    This has no place in eve. Not only have the nation's who flew these flags been long forgotten from a lore stand point this will bring little if anything positive from a game play standpoint

  • Reduced concord intervention on wormholes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Wouldn't it be easier to simply apply LE to any mutual combat? This would help maintain consistency within the system and have little to no negative effect on the rest of the game

  • Emojis in game in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Don't really fit eves theme and will input serve you take uses out of the experience

  • EVE Battle Royal~~~ in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Starwarpz Le wrote:
    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    This guy knows we have exactly this already right? Try doubt done basic research before wasting everyone's time with a post

    theomachy


    Wow, then i should say "oh im so sorry for wasting your time. Im only a newbee and had never heard of theomachy. Im so sorry!!!!" should i?



    Newbie or not there ate tools for searching.

  • Scripts are needless busywork in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Cade Windstalker wrote:
    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    Lothros Andastar wrote:
    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    nope. not only is there a lot of trade and isk made with these (not just a combat game) when you are out in areas that hubs are not easy to get to it forces compromise and adapting to situations. scrips are not used up like ammo but they are lost as ships die and this can leave a group without enough of some scripts to field the set up they want ideally.

    By that logic we should make T1 Lasers use normal ammo.


    explain


    I think he's saying that T1 Crystals work in a very similar manner, in that they're 1m3 ammo that only functions to change the stats of the module they're used with.

    The one reason I disagree with this is that you need way more of them than you need Scripts and there are far more options, to the point that a Frigate can end up using up significant cargo space on T1 Crystals if they want every available option.

    On top of that T1 guns still have Faction Ammo which has durability, and it doesn't make a lot of sense from a UI, coding, and player perspective for Lasers to only use ammo when it's something that degrades.



    that's what i thought he said too. but that doesn't follow with what i wrote. that is why i'm confused

  • Two easy steps to fix Citadels in High sec in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Matthias Ancaladron wrote:
    Old Pervert wrote:
    I wasn't aware that highsec citadels were even broken.

    They seem to work quite well.

    By broken people mean oversaturated.
    Go into a system and boom 30 cits everywhere cluttering things up.




    ... many systems already had POS on every moon and that is well over 30

  • Two easy steps to fix Citadels in High sec in EVE Technology and Research Center




    lol wut

    1. <- defeats the entire point

    2. <- why

    in fact why to any of this give a reason. you cant give ways to fix something you haven't shown as broken

  • Scripts are needless busywork in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Dior Ambraelle wrote:
    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    Old Pervert wrote:
    Completely agree. All it does is compound the "**** I forgot ammo" problem. Or the "here's a fit for XYZ, okay lets undock." ... "yo dude this fit doesn't have any ammo...brb..."

    I suspect there's probably a technical limitation which requires it, however.


    Well there is no "mode of operation" on any modules so script really are "T1 laser ammo" for them that have modifiers to the relevant stats.

    T3Ds have modes with different effects to switch between. If a ship can have them then a module should be able to get them too, this doesn't seem like a big difference.



    that's not how code works


    however they could simply "trick" the mod into thinking it had scripts in the cargo hold. not the cleanest way but at the very least should remove "it can't be done" from the topic

  • Scripts are needless busywork in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lothros Andastar wrote:
    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    nope. not only is there a lot of trade and isk made with these (not just a combat game) when you are out in areas that hubs are not easy to get to it forces compromise and adapting to situations. scrips are not used up like ammo but they are lost as ships die and this can leave a group without enough of some scripts to field the set up they want ideally.

    By that logic we should make T1 Lasers use normal ammo.


    explain

  • A few 'corrections' to current structure mechanics in EVE Technology and Research Center

    one of the great things about these was that you did not have to keep fuel in them. i would much rather a small tax that if unpayed marks the structure as derelict and puts it as always vulnerable

  • Scripts are needless busywork in EVE Technology and Research Center

    nope. not only is there a lot of trade and isk made with these (not just a combat game) when you are out in areas that hubs are not easy to get to it forces compromise and adapting to situations. scrips are not used up like ammo but they are lost as ships die and this can leave a group without enough of some scripts to field the set up they want ideally.

  • The Rook in EVE Technology and Research Center

    FT Cold wrote:
    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    FT Cold wrote:
    The rook could use a balance pass. Another low slot would be pretty useful, as it would be nice to be able to field a jam ship in an armor or 100mn gang that wasn't a tengu.



    A low will not do that for you with a rook. It simply doesn't have enough base armor ehp. Us the Griffin kits or if you Have a crap pilot use a scorpion


    Well the forum ate my post. vOv.

    Anyhow, yeah I do think it would be pretty useful, you don't really need much base armor when you've got 1600 plates; most cruisers don't have much over 2k. Enough buffer to catch reps and enough resists for reps to hold is all you need for an armor fit. In any event, it would still be very useful to fit a sigamp or an extra nano, both of which I think I'd rather have over an extra missile slot.

    You can do some neat stuff with the rook now, I've thought about some solo or small gang fits that could be fun, but I still agree with the OP. The kind of benefit you get from the covops cloak on the falcon simply outweighs most of the extra stuff you can do with the rook. Maybe it's time to look at the ECM mechanic instead and rebuild jam ships from the ground up, but as an interim solution, I wouldn't be opposed to moving a high to a low.




    once again the cov ops cloak doesn't help a falcon do what a rook does better. If you ate just hoping to catch reps in an armor fleet the rook can already do that.


    Now dose anyone have an actual problem with the rook other than x ship does something better than it.

  • [Petition] Santa Outfits For Xmas - PLEASE in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Matthias Ancaladron wrote:
    Character creation is overdue for being spruced up.
    .


    No, it is not.

    This here is a space ship game. The current character creater has so little to do with this game that it wasn't even built for eve.

    So no just about anything else would be a better use of time and resources. Them taking a week off and just hanging out at a pub would be better for eve.

  • EVE Battle Royal~~~ in EVE Technology and Research Center

    This guy knows we have exactly this already right? Try doubt done basic research before wasting everyone's time with a post

    theomachy

  • The Rook in EVE Technology and Research Center

    FT Cold wrote:
    The rook could use a balance pass. Another low slot would be pretty useful, as it would be nice to be able to field a jam ship in an armor or 100mn gang that wasn't a tengu.



    A low will not do that for you with a rook. It simply doesn't have enough base armor ehp. Us the Griffin kits or if you Have a crap pilot use a scorpion

  • Probably been discussed a million times, but Large Transports please in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Dior Ambraelle wrote:
    Teckos Pech wrote:
    Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
    ShahFluffers wrote:
    Jonah Gravenstein wrote:


    * It feels weird to say/type late 1900's

    Hehe...

    Wanna feel really old?

    - the first Toy Story was made 22 years ago

    - Nickelodeon debuted its first original animated series in 1991 – Doug, Rugrats, and The Ren & Stimpy Show – under the Nicktoons banner.
    That was 26 years ago.

    - the original iPhone more or less came out 10 years ago.

    - Anyone born in the 1980s and earlier sbould remember what a rotery phone is. And how to use it. Oh, and don't forget how one had to send messages via payphone without actually paying (ex: "Say. Your. Name. After. The. Prompt" *beeeeep* "Heymomcomepickmeupon30thandgrand,loveyoubye!!" )
    I saw A New Hope in the cinema on the day it released; it's 40 years old next Thursday.


    Jesus...are we that old guys?

    Who had the first version of the Game Boy here? It was released on April 21st, 1989 in Japan.
    By the way that thing is over a month older than I am! Does this make me young or old?


    ... young you're not even 30

  • The Rook in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Old Pervert wrote:
    So firstly, while your "tank" Rook fit is certainly tanky, it has a jam strength of 9 with heat. 9. Against even a T1 cruiser, that's less than a 50% chance to jam a single ship. It is also about as fast as a brick. Without heat (aka any sustained engagement) it has a whopping 7.5 jam strength, which means it's only able to jam a frigate with reliability. You're probably better off throwing EC-300s on your dps ships and flying something different altogether.

    The disconnect between our disagreement seems to be the differences between small scale engagements vs medium/large scale engagements.

    I will agree that in a small-scale engagement, where you feel their niche resides, the Rook is fine. It has plenty of tank, enough dps, and even with the jam chance sitting between 30-50%, landing a jam has significant tactical value because it neutralizes an appreciable portion of their fleet.

    Within a medium or large scale engagement, it should still be a useful ship in my opinion, and it's just not. As you've said, and as I've agreed, the Lachesis, Curse, and Huginn are all more valuable ships in a large engagement.

    I believe that its niche should include medium/large engagements for the sake of dynamic content. The fewer ships that are viable to bring to such an engagement, the more static the content becomes. The more different variables you add (in this case, additional viable hulls) the less static the content becomes.

    Feel free to disagree with my opinions on the expansion of the Rook's niche, it is pure opinion.


    Regarding the 25% thing, that isn't entirely true. By making the Rooks have a higher representation, the Huginn would see a natural reduction from some Huginn pilots flying Rooks instead. Nobody complains about the Huginn being OP. It quite honestly doesn't need a buff - none of the other combat recons do, because as you have said they're all in a very useful place.

    Anecdotally, I have never seen a Rook. Ever. We have doctrines which include the Lachesis, and I always try fly a Curse when intel says a Cynabal or similar is coming down the pipe in our home pocket (nothing like a heavy neut curse to say **** you to kite-cancer). I've been on killmails for all of them, except the Rook.



    No you would not see many huginn pilots sealing because unless your REALLY screw worth the rook their roles have no overlap at all you would see small amounts of lach pilots if they really buffed the rook. Only obese you would really see change are curse pilots and those who would normally be flying other types of ships.

    That you have not seen any rooks is irrelevant.

    They are powerful ships solo there is simply no way to buff them that will not unbalance them in this area. You want this ship to be more prominent I YOUR area of the game for no real reason other than you feel it should. Again the rook is strong in med to large fights but webs damps and points are better. This will be true no matter what unless the rook stats getting broken levels of jam strrangth. Simply because no matter what you do to make it tanker it's utility in these fights will not go up. If you raise it's dps much more it will see an increased level of power in small gangs larger than in big fleets. Meaning by the tune you raise it enough to make a difference at the level you want you're creating something scary in small gangs and terrifying in FW thanks to its D- scan immunity

Forum Signature