open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Blog: Upgrading and Upkeep of Sovereign Solar Systems in Dominion
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 79 80 81 82 [83] 84 85 86 87 ... : last (119)

Author Topic

Aralis
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:29:00 - [2461]
 

Kalisti also has a lot of good ideas.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:30:00 - [2462]
 

Originally by: FourDrink Minimum
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
excellent clarity of vision I must say!

It is true and something we said from outset that unbalanced alliances who are 95% PvP/Fleet and 5% industry will be most affected by this as we are reducing their dependency on passive point sources and introducing greater active resource density to allow for passive income to take over.

The alliances who will benefit most are those who have or aim to have balanced compositions of people with different playstyles or even act as enforcers or protectors of the space with multiple rental agreements if they wish and we will add tools as we call the treaty system to help facilitate that.



This is still the dumbest post in this thread.


No way. The dumbest post in the thread was this one:

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: EdfromHumanResources
How about that "Why is level 4's the cap for income?" We can either run level 4's in empire in COMPLETE SAFETY without paying 2b a month to own the system or ya, get anally ****d financially for what amounts to "almost meeting empire isk making"

No Stoffer, just no. 2b a month to support 15 people doesn't even sound remotely ****ing acceptable.


.........

Hopefully you have supplementary ways of making money, you know, like moon mining?


Yours is a pretty good #2, though.

Sethur Blackcoat
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:35:00 - [2463]
 

Originally by: Kepakh
Holy **** I'm dumb.

We are comparing the best available highsec income source to the best available 0.0 income source. The highsec one is more valuable. That is the problem.

Also are you seriously insinuating that if you have a system with TWO HUNDRED PEOPLE doing nothing but camping the gate so that one guy can rat in safety, that one guy shouldn't be making more money than in highsec? Considering that if all those people were in highsec, they'd ALL be making money without risk? By your own logic, that one guy should be making over 200 times the amount a highsec L4 runner does.

Isaac Starstriker
Amarr
Frontier Venture
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:35:00 - [2464]
 

Edited by: Isaac Starstriker on 09/11/2009 16:52:50
What I get from this thread: (I am no longer arguing mechanics, you ppl are flippin nuts on this)

1) whaaaaa change is scary1!!!!!111

2) Because we were so epic, worked so hard for what we own, there should be NO change WHATSOEVER. How DARE you make us change our playstyle!!!11!!! (Which btw has been changing for the last 4+ years. IE: exploration, POS setups, Orca, Jump drives, T2, T3, combat styles (removal of nano=invincible), I could go on here....)

Aralis, nevermind

3) Small Alliances have no chance of taking sov. So they have no chance now? LOL. Without a massive Dread fleet, trillions of isk and 1000s of members, small alliances have little to no chance. This expansion gives us a chance. (We only need hundreds of dreads, not thousands RazzRazz)(Btw, who said anything about 1 small alliance per area? Have fun defending against many alliances. CVA sure does) This whole argument is bogus. Small alliances will either A: take systems or B: not. CCP cannot give us a solution to this as that would require they nerf Goonies and we all know those annoying bees will never stop Razz. But really, we cannot cater to smaller alliances, at the same time, this expansion gives them the best chance they have. Because right now, they sure as hell have no chance of getting any.

4) Isk VS Reward =/= equate. So....what's your point? Low-sec has S*** reward for high-risk, yet I've had the most fun in low-sec. (I'm no pirate either) This argument is also laughable. People will come to 0.0 for their own reasons. Your never going to convince lvl 4 runners to come to low/null sec. Even if you remove lvl 4s altogether. Even if 0.0 was 2x more profitable. That is HUMAN NATURE.

You all scream and yell, yet in the big scheme of things, it means...well, it means w/e. CCP will listen but ultimately, your opinion is 1 of hundreds of thousands. Just because your suggestion is not taken doesn't mean CCP doesn't listen. Also, quit maxing out systems with cyno-jammers and jump bridges. You'll find funny enough, your isk cost is drastically reduced.

--Isaac

P.S. nothing in this post is mechanic-accurate, but is spirit-accurate.

Mikal Drey
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:36:00 - [2465]
 

Originally by: Verone
All the 0.0 alliances are ****ing and moaning because they've got huge amounts of space, in some cases 5 or 6 regions. This is going to force even the largest of alliances to downsize their claims to space and focus on one region.

It's also going to mean you're going to see smaller alliances forming treaties and pacts, claiming constellations in the same region because they can't afford to claim a whole region to themselves, and working together to form a coalition that holds a region between it.

It's actually going to make 0.0 politics more interesting again and promote claiming space to actually use it, rather than land grabbing for e-peen purposes. Taking a constellation is going to be something that's considered, pondered upon, checked out, scouted, looked over and decided upon, then the invasion takes place if its deemed both profitable and tactically advantageous to take and own the space.

It's way better and more immersive than saying "lol guys, lets go take Immensea for teh lulz!1"

What this means is that an alliance will have to take space, and hold it for a considerable amount of time, upgrading along the way to ensure its going to be useful to them as a long term investment. This is effectively causing space to seem much larger in terms of territorial claim, purely because the costs of owning and maintaining space are massively magnified in comparison to current mechanics.

Awesome idea.




you know i expected better from you tbvfh.

this new sov mechanic does nothing towards staking a claim. you need sov purely to upgrade a SYSTEM and put up a STRATEGIC pos. you could easily just completely ignore the sov system and never upgrade a system whatsoever. there is no regional claims and no constelation claims its a pointless system claim.

CCP have added a upgrade system with a isk cost to get isk back its a pay to play where theres no point except for keeping it in a single system.

if i want a jump bridge/Cyno Gen/Jammer i NEED sov but thats the ONLY reason i need sov.

the system upgrades are a isk sink in a form of tax. you have to now ofset the entire cost of installing and maintaining the upgrades before any profits are taken into consideration. like everyone else have realised ... **** it i'll jump back to empire instead.

for a new alliance to move in from a fresh regional claim they are facing a logistical nightmare with freighter escorts galore and huge setup and maintenence costs. and for what ? a few anomolies and plexes in 1 system . . . .rotfl

im no going to badmouth the system that much but its very very illconceived and is ANOTHER beta feature. I do like the upgrades but they are far from the awesome that we are about to get blogged with. CCP Soundwave foolishly mentioned a full upgrade is EQUIVILANT to empire and that helped spawn 80+ pages of rhetoric.

what i have now is a 0.0 where sov is pretty pointless and if i want sov im basically turning it into empire where carebearing is the norm.

I have lost a major reason to fight for something. fighting for a pay to play system is ridiculous

catching something you mentioned in that an improved constelation would actually be vastly better than 1 system supporting 10 people :/ OFC a constelation magnet has a balance issue.

Kepakh
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:42:00 - [2466]
 

Edited by: Kepakh on 09/11/2009 16:42:09
Originally by: Sethur Blackcoat
We are comparing the best available highsec income source to the best available 0.0 income source. The highsec one is more valuable. That is the problem.

Also are you seriously insinuating that if you have a system with TWO HUNDRED PEOPLE doing nothing but camping the gate so that one guy can rat in safety, that one guy shouldn't be making more money than in highsec? Considering that if all those people were in highsec, they'd ALL be making money without risk? By your own logic, that one guy should be making over 200 times the amount a highsec L4 runner does.


The best income? Why aren't you pulling out things like moon mining, cap production, scam or trading then?

/facepalm for the rest of the post.

Aralis
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:51:00 - [2467]
 

Originally by: Isaac Starstriker
Edited by: Isaac Starstriker on 09/11/2009 16:47:41
What I get from this thread: (I am no longer arguing mechanics, you ppl are flippin nuts on this)

1) whaaaaa change is scary1!!!!!111

2) Because we were so epic, worked so hard for what we own, there should be NO change WHATSOEVER. How DARE you make us change our playstyle!!!11!!! (Which btw has been changing for the last 4+ years. IE: exploration, POS setups, Orca, Jump drives, T2, T3, combat styles (removal of nano=invincible), I could go on here....)

Aralis, I'm looking at you on this. CVA, while I may support them in their goals, (Amarr Victor!) doesn't deserve special treatment. Your asking that it should. That's what I get from your posts. Your complaint is that there is a change period. So? Change happens. You also constantly quote "RP reasons" but hey dude: since when does infinite moon resources make any logical RP Sense ever? Or invulnerable POSes? Current 0.0 mechanics make no sense whatsoever RP wise.

3) Small Alliances have no chance of taking sov. So they have no chance now? LOL. Without a massive Dread fleet, trillions of isk and 1000s of members, small alliances have little to no chance. This expansion gives us a chance. (We only need hundreds of dreads, not thousands RazzRazz)(Btw, who said anything about 1 small alliance per area? Have fun defending against many alliances. CVA sure does) This whole argument is bogus. Small alliances will either A: take systems or B: not. CCP cannot give us a solution to this as that would require they nerf Goonies and we all know those annoying bees will never stop Razz. But really, we cannot cater to smaller alliances, at the same time, this expansion gives them the best chance they have. Because right now, they sure as hell have no chance of getting any.

4) Isk VS Reward =/= equate. So....what's your point? Low-sec has S*** reward for high-risk, yet I've had the most fun in low-sec. This argument is also pointless. People will come to 0.0 for their own reasons. Your never going to convince lvl 4 runners to come to low/null sec. Even if you remove lvl 4s altogether. Even if 0.0 was 2x more profitable. That is HUMAN NATURE.

You all scream and yell, yet in the big scheme of things, it means...well, it means w/e. CCP will listen but ultimately, your opinion is 1 of hundreds of thousands. Just because your suggestion is not taken doesn't mean CCP doesn't listen. Also, quit maxing out systems with cyno-jammers and jump bridges. You'll find funny enough, your isk cost is drastically reduced.

--Isaac

P.S. nothing in this post is mechanic-accurate, but is spirit-accurate.


Isaac I am not and have never defended the level 4 sov mechanism. It's stupid. The whole sov CONCEPT is stupid. But this patch makes things worse not better.

Wait 24Hours
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:51:00 - [2468]
 

Edited by: Wait 24Hours on 09/11/2009 16:51:37
In the future is cynojamming, generating and achoring of jump bridges even going to be possible anywhere you choose? The reason I ask is because the desciption on the upgrade says anchorable at starbases and to me that doesn't equal a POS.

If these upgrades aren't available to non outpost systems wont it make people who are trying to venture in nullsec lives even more difficult? Since they will basically be fresh meat for estabilished alliances and their capital fleetS?

correct me if I am wrong but this would be pretty significant.

e: grammar

Isaac Starstriker
Amarr
Frontier Venture
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:52:00 - [2469]
 

[quote/]

Isaac I am not and have never defended the level 4 sov mechanism. It's stupid. The whole sov CONCEPT is stupid. But this patch makes things worse not better.


I see....thanks for clarifying.

--Isaac

Kepakh
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:54:00 - [2470]
 

Edited by: Kepakh on 09/11/2009 16:55:21
Originally by: Aralis

Isaac I am not and have never defended the level 4 sov mechanism. It's stupid. The whole sov CONCEPT is stupid. But this patch makes things worse not better.

If only taxes would involve sovereignty, it would be a blast for CVA.

Also, tax based on mining laser yield sounds good :)

NxN
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:57:00 - [2471]
 

Edited by: NxN on 09/11/2009 16:57:40
Yeah, this is really bad. It shifts the whole thing entirely.


I WANT TO HOLD THE SYSTEM BECAUSE I CAN DEFEND IT!!!

Not because I can pay damn bills...




Really get a grip CCP. Besides you need ISK to PvP anyways.

Daedalus II
Helios Research
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:58:00 - [2472]
 

I don't understand why you constantly say that new alliances will have so much trouble getting into 0.0 after Dominion?

From what I hear in this thread 0.0 will completely deserted only days after Dominion hits, because all previous inhabitants have either moved to high sec to run lvl 4 missions or ragequit Very Happy

One month after Dominion, 0.0 will be full of happily mining carebears while the 0.0 people have taken over the high sec lvl 4 mission running even though they utterly hate that Smile

There is only one other thing I can add here: HTFU!

Kepakh
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:59:00 - [2473]
 

Originally by: NxN
Yeah, this is really bad. It shifts the whole thing entirely.


I WANT TO HOLD THE SYSTEM BECAUSE I CAN DEFEND IT!!!

Not because I can pay damn bills...




Really get a grip CCP.


You don't have to hold sovereignty over all space you want to control. Defending it will be quite a challenge actually.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:59:00 - [2474]
 

Originally by: Verone
All the 0.0 alliances are ****ing and moaning because they've got huge amounts of space, in some cases 5 or 6 regions. This is going to force even the largest of alliances to downsize their claims to space and focus on one region.

It's also going to mean you're going to see smaller alliances forming treaties and pacts, claiming constellations in the same region because they can't afford to claim a whole region to themselves, and working together to form a coalition that holds a region between it.

It's actually going to make 0.0 politics more interesting again and promote claiming space to actually use it, rather than land grabbing for e-peen purposes. Taking a constellation is going to be something that's considered, pondered upon, checked out, scouted, looked over and decided upon, then the invasion takes place if its deemed both profitable and tactically advantageous to take and own the space.

It's way better and more immersive than saying "lol guys, lets go take Immensea for teh lulz!1"

What this means is that an alliance will have to take space, and hold it for a considerable amount of time, upgrading along the way to ensure its going to be useful to them as a long term investment. This is effectively causing space to seem much larger in terms of territorial claim, purely because the costs of owning and maintaining space are massively magnified in comparison to current mechanics.

Awesome idea.


Everyone's agreed that it's an awesome idea. The vision you outline is a great one, and CCP, 0.0 players, and empire-dwellers all agree on that. The problem isn't the idea, it's the execution. In order for what you propose to actually happen, the system upgrades have to be big and useful, or else alliances won't stop sprawling. Right now, the upgrades are small and crap, so nobody cares and nothing will change. It's a shame, really.

Also, because it's not Sunday night any more, it's time to start spamming the question again: YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.

Lolion Reglo
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:01:00 - [2475]
 

Edited by: Lolion Reglo on 09/11/2009 17:09:12
Edited by: Lolion Reglo on 09/11/2009 17:08:18
Edited by: Lolion Reglo on 09/11/2009 17:04:53
perhaps a change in price then of what it will cost to control a system?... hmm oh wait didnt i propose that a few posts back? wouldnt that fix half the issues people are *****ing about right now? just an idea. you know,... maybe if people would look at it and debate if the numbers i propsed we might get ccp to change the price to fix this... you know... maybe. not trying to drop a HUGE ****ING HINT HERE. rofl.

Edit: Linky if anyone you know... is just curious...
Linkage

Kepakh
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:04:00 - [2476]
 

Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Also, because it's not Sunday night any more, it's time to start spamming the question again: YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.


What effort? Jumping through gate in a shuttle? Should I be paid for that? 1 hour of jumping through 0.0 gates making me +45M?
It is indeed increased risk to move around 0.0 as well as logistical challenge.

Sethur Blackcoat
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:05:00 - [2477]
 

Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Also, because it's not Sunday night any more, it's time to start spamming the question again: YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.

It's not Sunday night anymore, but it's 5 p.m. in Iceland so all the devs are probably going home again already, gg nextmap no re~

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:07:00 - [2478]
 

Originally by: Verone
All the 0.0 alliances are ****ing and moaning because they've got huge amounts of space, in some cases 5 or 6 regions. This is going to force even the largest of alliances to downsize their claims to space and focus on one region.

Yes you see our logistics guys really really enjoy fuelling hundreds of towers in empty space just for the hell of it, flying round in a lumbering fat jump freighter and dealing with buggy POS mechanics is so exciting.

Quote:
Taking a constellation is going to be something that's considered, pondered upon, checked out, scouted, looked over and decided upon, then the invasion takes place if its deemed both profitable and tactically advantageous to take and own the space.

Hint: it won't be. Any rational assessment of an invasion will quickly conclude that it isn't worth the bother and the alliance may as well just go to farm L4s in Motsu (with, if they fancy themselves as PvPers as well, the occasional roaming gang into lowsec or syndicate) instead.

Quote:
It's way better and more immersive than saying "lol guys, lets go take Immensea for teh lulz!1"

Who, at any time during the current incarnation of the Sovereignty mechanics, has decided to take over a region 'for teh lulz'? Owning 0.0 space isn't fun, it involves literally hundreds of man hours of tedious bullshit involving towers and anchoring timers and modules and fuel, and under the new system will involve many tedious man hours of ratting (or more likely, L4 highsec missioning on alts) to pay a sov tax.

Quote:
What this means is that an alliance will have to take space, and hold it for a considerable amount of time, upgrading along the way to ensure its going to be useful to them as a long term investment.

What it means is that a new alliance arriving in 0.0 will have to conjure up a large amount of ISK to start paying the sov tax right away, spend more ISK on buying and putting up installations, all in the hope that a few months down the line they might hopefully start to get a highsec L4-equivalent income from them just as long as one of their neighbours doesnt invade and take it off them (or just camp the ratters in with a handful of recons).

Or, you know, they could just go to Motsu and get that highsec L4 income straight away, free, easy, CONCORD protected, with a highsec market on the doorstep and docking rights for all.

Quote:
This is effectively causing space to seem much larger in terms of territorial claim, purely because the costs of owning and maintaining space are massively magnified in comparison to current mechanics.

Awesome idea.

Confirming that making 0.0 harder, more tedious, less secure and no more rewarding than highsec is an awesome idea to encourage more people to take part in it.

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Prof Fail
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:08:00 - [2479]
 

I'm not exactly a roleplayer, but I have to agree with some of the posters here:

Besides all other downsides of this Expansion, it makes really no sense to pay bills to concord in lawless 0.0 space. Concord is supposed to be in Empire. 0.0 space is totally empty, lawless and free to claim by players. To involve Concord in this process ist dumb.

Alekanderu
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:09:00 - [2480]
 

Originally by: Kepakh
I am in a system with cyno jammer and bubbled gates are perma camped by 200+ man blobs. I undock and warp to first belt. Should rats have higher bounties there just because I am in 0.0? Where is the risk? None, nada.



how can you post something this stupendously moronic and expect anyone to take anything you say even remotely seriously?

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:10:00 - [2481]
 

Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto

Also, because it's not Sunday night any more, it's time to start spamming the question again: YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.


Yes, but that must include the corp level reward (i.e. the moon goo) after you have removed the operative costs.


Otin Bison
Gallente
Bison Industrial Inc
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:10:00 - [2482]
 

Originally by: Batolemaeus
Edited by: Batolemaeus on 09/11/2009 14:23:32
Originally by: Otin Bison
Umm .. your personal ISK is only small because your alliance doesn't share any of the untold billions of passive ISK monthly from moons.


That's because my personal isk are my personal isk, FYI. They're for strategically useless expenditures, like buying a few hundred exotic dancers to put in my cargo during ops, or losing weirdly fitted guardians while flying solo.

My alliance (or corp, rather. Alliances don't have wallets as per game mechanic) is handing me free dreads, battleships, logistics, dictors however. Guess how those are being paid for..or the jump bridge infrastructure i can use for free. The fuel for my capitals that i get for free. All the little things that i get for free because in the end i'm one of the guys helping to sustain that stuff.


So, you get your PvP on for free? Is what you're saying?
So, why all the consternation by folk about their ISK making in 0.0 ?
I seem to be missing somthing here? Will continure to read ...

Sorry for the double quotes ... but needed in this case.

marxist revolutionary
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:11:00 - [2483]
 

all this is going to do is drive more people away from 0.0 and make it even emptier than it is. anyone who doesn't see this is a drooling idiot

Tamahra
Gallente
Apina.
United Pod Service
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:13:00 - [2484]
 

Edited by: Tamahra on 09/11/2009 17:16:20

Originally by: marxist revolutionary
all this is going to do is drive more people away from 0.0 and make it even emptier than it is. anyone who doesn't see this is a drooling idiot


not only that, i fear. CCP is in a real danger to pull their own NGE now, if they mess up with Dominion.

As of now, its required to delay the expansion and put it back to the drawingboard. Once the harm is done, it is done. but they can still turn the wheel and come up with something good.

When theres such a huge outcry from the playerbase, you as a developer MUST react to it.

Pulling it through, as it is planned now, goes against the vast majority of the customers. And that would be an NGE.

Graalum
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:13:00 - [2485]
 

Originally by: Kepakh
Edited by: Kepakh on 09/11/2009 08:26:33
Originally by: gambrinous

so that's 10 ppl that can "mission", what about the other 1000? oh ye, just claim a 100 systems ... wait Rolling Eyes

do you live there? I do, those upgrades are meaning less to me.

E: btw where did all the uninformed trolls come from all of a sudden, lol is ccp back at work and poasting on their alts?


10 guaranteed anomalies seems better than 2 belt ratters. In any case it is better than what you have now and the numbers are a subject to change so stop trolling.





you forget that anoms are ****

Hot Fudge
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:14:00 - [2486]
 

What happened with the Dev responses? Kinda dried up, eh?

marxist revolutionary
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:15:00 - [2487]
 

Originally by: Tamahra
Originally by: marxist revolutionary
all this is going to do is drive more people away from 0.0 and make it even emptier than it is. anyone who doesn't see this is a drooling idiot


not only that, i fear. CCP is in a real danger to pull their own NGE now, if they mess up with Dominion.


no they won't, doesn't most of the playerbase live out of 0.0 ?

Honest Smedley
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:15:00 - [2488]
 

Originally by: Kepakh
Edited by: Kepakh on 09/11/2009 16:55:21
Originally by: Aralis

Isaac I am not and have never defended the level 4 sov mechanism. It's stupid. The whole sov CONCEPT is stupid. But this patch makes things worse not better.

If only taxes would involve sovereignty, it would be a blast for CVA.

They need to allow for taxation on the alliance level, and for treaty-specific taxation rates in the coming treaty system.

Kepakh
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:16:00 - [2489]
 

Originally by: Alekanderu
how can you post something this stupendously moronic and expect anyone to take anything you say even remotely seriously?

Because I am expecting someone else but Goons read this thread, someone being able to understand that exaggareted example serves for better demonstration of principles behind it.

You can read the comparison with shuttle couple posts above if that is more understandable for you.

Bobby Atlas
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:18:00 - [2490]
 

Considering the work day is nearly over in Iceland and we have not had a CCP reply in about 2 days, it is safe to assume they are not going to reply to this thread anymore. What will probably happen is they make a new devblog with revised numbers and hopefully some other changes relative to this thread then we all have to start commenting in that one.


Pages: first : previous : ... 79 80 81 82 [83] 84 85 86 87 ... : last (119)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only