• Home
  • Index
  • Search
  • Download
  • Server Rules
  • House Roleplay Laws
  • Player Utilities
  • Player Help
  • Forum Utilities
  • Returning Player?
  • Toggle Sidebar
Interactive Nav-Map
Tutorials
New Wiki
ID reference
Restart reference
Players Online
Player Activity
Faction Activity
Player Base Status
Discord Help Channel
DarkStat
Server public configs
POB Administration
Missing Powerplant
Stuck in Connecticut
Account Banned
Lost Ship/Account
POB Restoration
Disconnected
Member List
Forum Stats
Show Team
View New Posts
View Today's Posts
Calendar
Help
Archive Mode




Hi there Guest,  
Existing user?   Sign in    Create account
Login
Username:
Password: Lost Password?
 
  Discovery Gaming Community Discovery General Discovery RP 24/7 General Discussions
« Previous 1 … 84 85 86 87 88 778 Next »
Sorry what?

Server Time (24h)

Players Online

Active Events - Scoreboard

Latest activity

Pages (8): « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »
Sorry what?
Offline Lythrilux
12-19-2015, 02:45 AM,
#41
Edgy Worlds
Posts: 10,356
Threads: 737
Joined: Jan 2013

(12-19-2015, 02:44 AM)FallenKnight Wrote:
(12-19-2015, 02:39 AM)Lythrilux Wrote: it's just these battleship cerb changes seem so random and illogical.
People were asking the devs to extend the "cap battles" for years. How would you propose that to happen? By adding more hit points - pool of life - to each cap? It would be time consuming to fix all ships and in the end it wont be the right decision. By nerfing the "primary" source of damage in cap battles - the ship remain same but they simply wont do "that" much damage in such a short time. Do you understand what I am trying to explain you?

Who says cap fight needs to be made longer? I don't see a community majority echoing that opinion.

[Image: Lythrilux.gif]
Reply  
Offline Vendetta
12-19-2015, 02:47 AM,
#42
Technocrat Overlord
Posts: 2,689
Threads: 230
Joined: Sep 2013

Good. Now there will be more variety and thought put into cap loadouts. Fights will become interesting.

Currently unable to consistently be present in the Community due to life constraints.

Youtube
------
[Image: rherh3.png]
Reply  
Offline FallenKnight
12-19-2015, 02:47 AM, (This post was last modified: 12-19-2015, 02:51 AM by FallenKnight.)
#43
Member
Posts: 1,077
Threads: 69
Joined: May 2010

Actually this change will lead to something else...all battleships (or most of them) will put 1x Mortar, 1x Missle, 1x razor (and +1 more for heavist BBs). It will be hilarious for all to see indies spamming missles and razors here and there. I don't mean it would be bad from people that know what they're doing but just imagine LNS indies spamming 12 missles in middle of brawl Big Grin

(12-19-2015, 02:45 AM)Lythrilux Wrote: Who says cap fight needs to be made longer? I don't see a community majority echoing that opinion.
Since I remember myself being here. Back then it was problematic cuz 12 primaries firing on you was same as 2-3 cerbs with 4 primaries - battles were fast and less fun. I can't track down all the threads but trust me - a lot of players wanted to fight longer in caps and primary - longer in battleships (referring to BB vs BB).

(12-19-2015, 02:47 AM)Vendetta Wrote: Good. Now there will be more variety and thought put into cap loadouts. Fights will become interesting.
Exactly...

[Image: HEdQNeI.png]
[Image: iELcapo.png]
Discovery Bridges[Feedback] Baron Piett[Biography]
Reply  
Offline Skorak
12-19-2015, 02:48 AM,
#44
3x Custom User Title
Posts: 4,422
Threads: 503
Joined: Mar 2008

Why would anyone put such a mixed loadout? And people didn't use missiles for another reason. I don't see a big revival on that side.

[Image: 4M4UTts.png]
[Image: IDgpvpG.png][Image: T5nJFSb.png] [Image: R2wbzfN.png] [Image: dAW1eot.png111] [Image: R2wbzfN.png] [Image: OECngVP.png77] [Image: R2wbzfN.png] [Image: 7ODm3kk.png33] [Image: R2wbzfN.png] [Image: RKgpLfI.png88]
Reply  
Offline jide
12-19-2015, 02:49 AM,
#45
Member
Posts: 298
Threads: 55
Joined: May 2008

come on lad!

Breath, keep cool, play disco, repeat!

you have each a point of view but final words come from dev. like ive already said: lets try it! lets hate it (or love it)! ONLY then we will be able to judge its a mistake and im pretty sure devs will take not of everybody griefs!

Proud member of the most hated faction

[Image: avatar_10099.png?dateline=1433281995]
  Reply  
Offline Wesker
12-19-2015, 02:50 AM,
#46
Level 99 Boss
Posts: 5,294
Threads: 457
Joined: Nov 2014

(12-19-2015, 02:39 AM)FallenKnight Wrote:
(12-19-2015, 02:20 AM)Snoopy Wrote: Edit: Cerbs at this range are just asking for more decloaking ships
Not exactly. These changes will also "nerf" the decloaking assaults - because if you uncloak in front of someone at 1.5km range with 0 shields...you do realize you are going down unless you are valor, right?

This whole thing will force players to play safer, keep distance and play smart. Also it seems "heavy slots" will become something like a "special" slot to mount "something" supportive and yet not so important, being long range (mortars/missles) or close range (cerberus/razors).

A ransuer decloaking on a mako will win

A legate decloaking on an osiris will win

A marduk decloaking on any light BS will win.

A arbiter decloaking on a lib dread will win.

This makes the valor once again the most powerful battleship.

A kusari BS decloaking on a Dragon BS will kill it.

You might as well delete all light/medium battleships.

[Image: P6DLUCr.png?4][Image: AX5RcTh.png?4]
Reply  
Offline Skorak
12-19-2015, 02:51 AM,
#47
3x Custom User Title
Posts: 4,422
Threads: 503
Joined: Mar 2008

You want to delete all light and medium battleships because there are cloaks? Wouldn't the more logical thing be to delete cloaks then?

[Image: 4M4UTts.png]
[Image: IDgpvpG.png][Image: T5nJFSb.png] [Image: R2wbzfN.png] [Image: dAW1eot.png111] [Image: R2wbzfN.png] [Image: OECngVP.png77] [Image: R2wbzfN.png] [Image: 7ODm3kk.png33] [Image: R2wbzfN.png] [Image: RKgpLfI.png88]
Reply  
Offline Lythrilux
12-19-2015, 02:53 AM,
#48
Edgy Worlds
Posts: 10,356
Threads: 737
Joined: Jan 2013

(12-19-2015, 02:47 AM)FallenKnight Wrote: Actually this change will lead to something else...all battleships (or most of them) will put 1x Mortar, 1x Missle, 1x razor (and +1 more for heavist BBs). It will be hilarious for all to see indies spamming missles and razors here and there.

And dying because battleships aren't going to be viable any more. Like I said earlier; don't fix what isn't broken. Sometimes simplicity can be excellent. I don't understand why there's this massive desire to completely revolutionize something that already works perfectly fine that could yield negative results.

[Image: Lythrilux.gif]
Reply  
Offline Durandal
12-19-2015, 02:53 AM,
#49
Member
Posts: 5,106
Threads: 264
Joined: Apr 2009

(12-19-2015, 02:50 AM)Wesker Wrote:
(12-19-2015, 02:39 AM)FallenKnight Wrote:
(12-19-2015, 02:20 AM)Snoopy Wrote: Edit: Cerbs at this range are just asking for more decloaking ships
Not exactly. These changes will also "nerf" the decloaking assaults - because if you uncloak in front of someone at 1.5km range with 0 shields...you do realize you are going down unless you are valor, right?

This whole thing will force players to play safer, keep distance and play smart. Also it seems "heavy slots" will become something like a "special" slot to mount "something" supportive and yet not so important, being long range (mortars/missles) or close range (cerberus/razors).

A ransuer decloaking on a mako will win

A legate decloaking on an osiris will win

A marduk decloaking on any light BS will win.

A arbiter decloaking on a lib dread will win.

This makes the valor once again the most powerful battleship.

A kusari BS decloaking on a Dragon BS will kill it.

You might as well delete all light/medium battleships.

That already happens?
Reply  
Offline Clavius
12-19-2015, 02:53 AM,
#50
Member
Posts: 538
Threads: 65
Joined: Aug 2009

(12-19-2015, 02:50 AM)Wesker Wrote:
(12-19-2015, 02:39 AM)FallenKnight Wrote:
(12-19-2015, 02:20 AM)Snoopy Wrote: Edit: Cerbs at this range are just asking for more decloaking ships
Not exactly. These changes will also "nerf" the decloaking assaults - because if you uncloak in front of someone at 1.5km range with 0 shields...you do realize you are going down unless you are valor, right?

This whole thing will force players to play safer, keep distance and play smart. Also it seems "heavy slots" will become something like a "special" slot to mount "something" supportive and yet not so important, being long range (mortars/missles) or close range (cerberus/razors).

A ransuer decloaking on a mako will win

A legate decloaking on an osiris will win

A marduk decloaking on any light BS will win.

A arbiter decloaking on a lib dread will win.

This makes the valor once again the most powerful battleship.

A kusari BS decloaking on a Dragon BS will kill it.

You might as well delete all light/medium battleships.

FYI, devs have implemented cloak disruptors.
Also, why is everyone crying about this before they even had a chance to test it out? For all you know, it might be more fun to go with a different setup rather then with "cerbs or lose". Give it a week or 2 and after that start crying again.
Reply  
Pages (8): « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »


  • View a Printable Version
  • Subscribe to this thread


Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)



Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2025 MyBB Group. Theme © 2014 iAndrew & DiscoveryGC
  • Contact Us
  •  Lite mode
Linear Mode
Threaded Mode