Free Allegiance Forums

Did anyone else notice the Freudian slip in the topic of this thread?

"Proposed" became "Proposted" which is awfully close to...


PREPOSTEROUS

I would like IC TPs galvable.

Spunkmeyer wrote:QUOTE (Spunkmeyer @ Mar 2 2011, 09:50 AM) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogy

5th? Please. There is no statistical difference between those options after reduce paydays (which didn't work so great did it) and increase BIOS fig scale.

But if we are playing poll wars:
http://www.freeallegiance.org/forums/index...showtopic=61779

If still not satisfied:
http://www.freeallegiance.org/forums/index...showtopic=61939

None of anything you posted addressed why you decided bios figs losing prox was needed vs any other solutions.

spideycw wrote:QUOTE (spideycw @ Mar 2 2011, 07:52 PM) None of anything you posted addressed why you decided bios figs losing prox was needed vs any other solutions.

Correct, because you didn't ask that question, which in turn is answered by Das above.

If you want me to word it, it doesn't make much sense to remove much of early BIOS vulnerability with cloaking prox fighters, fast-launching constructors (which we left in) and gunships, then turnaround and say they are too strong. Factions should remain in character, and a more usable heavy cloak is the way to go here.

I like a lot of these changes, but I think the RP and Beacon nerfs are a bit Faircore.

Reduce their scan ranges, or increase their sigs. Don't do both.

Why are you people so stupid?

Kumquat wrote:QUOTE (Kumquat @ Mar 5 2011, 01:42 AM) Why are you people so stupid?

I am no supporter of the "XC" line of cores, like many detractors of the recent CC changes, but I find myself agreeing with this.