open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Letter from the CSM
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 : last (11)

Author Topic

CCP Veritas

Posted - 2011.04.12 00:59:00 - [211]
 

Well hello there. Guess I should poke my head in here since it was me who spilled the beans about Time Dilation at the roundtable and soforth.

Originally by: Evelgrivion
Nothing wrong with time dilation, but if it was already in the development pipeline. Time Dilation was presented during discussions over the term with CSM5, and it was a topic at fanfest roundtables. With a project so far along, I don't want to hear about it from the CSM, I want to hear about it from CCP.

It's been on the long term plan since Gridlock was formed. At that time there was plenty of easy things to fix that improved base performance way out of proportion with the effort needed to make them. We still find those occasionally, but the field is getting rougher.

Because of that, we've been transitioning to bigger projects, and so this naturally has come to the forefront again. I'm glad it came up during the roundtable at Fanfest so I could get some feedback on it outside of the CSM summit cycle. Turns out there's a lot of positive feedback about it, so that moves it right up to the forefront for me. Not our lone focus, but one of them.

Originally by: Cyaxares II
CCP will have to pay very close attention to the changes to gameplay mechanics that would result from the interaction of dilated and "real time" parts of EVE (session timers, structure timers, logoff timers, warp/movement speed, ...).

I don't expect this to be easy at all and am a little afraid that a naive "let's just make all modules cycle slower" implementation might get pushed out without careful assessment of the consequences.

Oh indeed, this is no easy peasy task. Thankfully for you, making modules cycle slower probably wouldn't even solve much, so not much risk of us going with that kind of half-solution.

You have, incidentally, pointed out one of the biggest nasties involved here - making sure that dilated time (modules, physics) and normal time (structure timers and the like) don't ever mix. That's going to be fun.

Originally by: Maplestone
Is the general "O" of fleet battles known? That is to say, how does the computational power required scale with the number of ships in a large battle?

Not precisely. It's not linear in the number of ships - there's some fundamentally n^2 problems involved. We're not fully n^2 either...it's somewhere in between. It's shifted a lot since Gridlock was formed as well, so I'm afraid I can't really tell ya where it's at today because I don't know.

Originally by: J Kunjeh
I'm waiting with giddy anticipation at the Dev blog to come Soon on the time dilation thing to know for sure, but I'm fairly certain it could be implemented to scale....so the more people load the node, the more it dilates.

I'll ruin the surprise - the idea is to dynamically slow down time as the server needs in order to remain responsive. There'll probably have to be a limit *somewhere*, but I can't say where that'll be...I'll probably need to do some trial 'n' error on that one to find a happy balance.

CCP Veritas

Posted - 2011.04.12 01:00:00 - [212]
 

Originally by: Spooks'em
The first thing I wanted to say is Team Gridlock best Gridlock.

<3
Originally by: Spooks'em
Secondly, Time Dilation is an overdue idea and absolutely essential to the future growth and vibrancy of Eve.

<3 <3 <3
Originally by: Spooks'em
Third, Time Dilation will not fix any of the problems in Eve. It might seem like the perfect solution but if it takes me 9 minutes(~32x time dilation) to cycle my 1400's to keep the game playable I, and many people, are not going to be playing Eve for very long.

Awwwww. Well, let me put it this way, a situation that'll require running at 3% normal time isn't going to be particularly playable as we stand today. It's my sincere hope that such a setup (which I'd wager would be beyond our current record in one system) would be more agreeable in a dilated system than it is today.

I mean, it's not like you're going to be able to toss 3000 people in a system and have things running hunky dorry just because of time dilation. It's going to be slow, but it's also going to be more fair, more predictable, and have the game mechanics intact. I think that's a solid improvement.

Does it solve lag forever and ever? Nope. Nothing short of putting hard limits on how many players can participate in a fight will. I don't see us doing that any time soon, so the war against lag goes on~
Originally by: Lots of People
Stuff about CSM effectiveness

I can only really speak for myself, but I found some of the CSM5 delegates to be a fantastic resource when it came to finding out how, exactly, lag effects the players. I'm not particularly into the 0.0 game, so that window into the player experience has been of great value to me. It has allowed me to identify problems that didn't appear to be nasty from a purely technical standpoint, but were a major barrier to the player experience. I'm hoping to build upon that relationship with CSM6 - so far so good.

Anyways, I'll cook up a devblog about this all in the near future.

Mitchello
B O R G
Posted - 2011.04.12 01:11:00 - [213]
 

<3

The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 01:12:00 - [214]
 

that was a lot faster of a response than we had been expecting; i'm just gonna go ahead ~lean back~ a bit to chill now

booyah

UAxDEATH
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.04.12 01:14:00 - [215]
 

Originally by: CCP Veritas

I can only really speak for myself, but I found some of the CSM5 delegates to be a fantastic resource when it came to finding out how, exactly, lag effects the players. I'm not particularly into the 0.0 game, so that window into the player experience has been of great value to me. It has allowed me to identify problems that didn't appear to be nasty from a purely technical standpoint, but were a major barrier to the player experience. I'm hoping to build upon that relationship with CSM6 - so far so good.

Anyways, I'll cook up a devblog about this all in the near future.



<3

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 01:27:00 - [216]
 

Edited by: Lord Zim on 12/04/2011 01:40:53
Originally by: Sethose Olderon

Time Dilation is one solution to crippled fleet engagements in nullsec, and I agree something should be done about lag. However, what CSM6 I think fails to realize, is that there is more to Eve than nullsec.

I'm not so sure they fail to realize this, it's just the first thing to be focused upon.

Originally by: Sethose Olderon

It's been years since we were promised an industry overhaul and it keeps getting pushed to the rear because of crap like this. If it weren't for the industrialists who also deal with crappy mechanics, none of you would have ships. Don't forget about us, the mechanics we use need attention as well!

I couldn't agree more. Even now I keep cursing various "aspects" of even the newly added PI, f.ex the import/export part is annoyingly clunky, the setup phase is annoyingly clunky, etc. And don't get me started on the ****can that is the POS production processes control interface. I'd stab people with a fork to get that **** fixed. Even something as simple as just being able to reorganize the processes to something I think of as a logical order would make me a happy man.

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 01:40:00 - [217]
 

Originally by: CCP Veritas
It's been on the long term plan since Gridlock was formed. At that time there was plenty of easy things to fix that improved base performance way out of proportion with the effort needed to make them. We still find those occasionally, but the field is getting rougher.

Not really on-topic, but I keep dreaming about seeing things like drones, fighters, fighter bombers, missiles etc moved from the solar system process (where I assume it is now) to a pr player process so it would be much simpler to scale up to almost limitless fights.

I'm assuming there's tons of issues involved in this which makes it unrealistic, alternatively tons of sync issues, so just for my own sake, please shoot my idea down in a fire. :D

Maplestone
Myth and Peace Lords
Posted - 2011.04.12 02:31:00 - [218]
 

Originally by: CCP Veritas
Originally by: Maplestone
Is the general "O" of fleet battles known? That is to say, how does the computational power required scale with the number of ships in a large battle?

Not precisely. It's not linear in the number of ships - there's some fundamentally n^2 problems involved. We're not fully n^2 either...it's somewhere in between. It's shifted a lot since Gridlock was formed as well, so I'm afraid I can't really tell ya where it's at today because I don't know.


Thanks :)

My fear in watching this discussion evolve is that players are going to fix their imagination on the idea of time dialation being linear (2x as many ships takes only 2x as long for time-dilated cycles to pass) and be disappointed at the results if it gets implmented.

I like the idea of gracefully failing an overloaded server but I'd recommend that people keep a full O(n^2) vision in their imaginations when thinking of time dialation: imagine 2x as many ships as the minimum to induce lag would slow the game to 1/4 speed; 10x as many ships would slow to 1/100th speed.

Mattress Lover
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 02:42:00 - [219]
 

Lag ruins fleet battles and smart operators have used it to their benefit for a long time. Many battles have been won in a completely unfair way, hopefully time dilation will level the playing field. As a 0.0 resident I support CPP 100% in this endeavor.

I knew Mittani would be brilliant as a chairman, so far he's living up to expectations.

Rex Augustus
Interwebs Cooter Explosion
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2011.04.12 03:12:00 - [220]
 

Edited by: Rex Augustus on 12/04/2011 03:18:34
I'm really rather impressed at the quick reply from CCP myself, tbh.

That said - Time Dilation is a band aid. Even Veritas admits it's such -
Originally by: CCP Veritas

Oh indeed, this is no easy peasy task. Thankfully for you, making modules cycle slower probably wouldn't even solve much, so not much risk of us going with that kind of half-solution.


Continuing, with that thought, then - what, if any, plans are there to seriously give re-examination of the server engine to something more highly performant than Python? I mean, seriously. C++ and even Java were far enough along 12-15 years ago that they would have made better choices over Python.

If a rewrite/re-engineering project isn't in the works, threading started showing up in early Python2 releases, with more robust support added over time - is implementing some of that functionality also being considered?

Sorry to bang on the more technical side - I'm by far no longer a coder (ask me about architecting highly available and performant server solutions including public & private cloud integration, and I can help :))

Hell of a good start to CSM6. Keep it up, Mittens & Co.

Edit: hit submit too soon.

Nypheas Azurai
Posted - 2011.04.12 03:13:00 - [221]
 

Edited by: Nypheas Azurai on 12/04/2011 03:16:30
"Public" goon mumble server is password-protected. fail.

nvm, their wiki is outdated and points to some non-public IP address. use the domain name instead: public-mumble.goonfleet.com

RooSan
Posted - 2011.04.12 03:35:00 - [222]
 

Hey good read and congratulations to all that are involved in the new CSM6

DurrHurrDurr
Posted - 2011.04.12 03:39:00 - [223]
 

Edited by: DurrHurrDurr on 12/04/2011 03:40:05
I see the term blobbing consistently thrown around in this thread, and time and time again the griping about the term makes me laugh.

There's no practical way to break n+1. If there's no artificial limit to the amount of people that can be brought to an engagement, one side will always bring more. If an artificial limit is introduced, then the game isn't really a sandbox anymore.

The usage of the term blobbing itself, however, has always been pretty hilarious to me. In a game where success is inevitably one of the only metrics by which any group will be judged, it's mindboggling to me that players still have their heads so deep in the ground that they don't realize that the amassment, management and deployment of large volumes of people is in and of itself an issue that alliances have to deal with. The "remove blobbing" aspect just isn't ever going to happen, especially in a game such as EVE Online. People will always figure out a way to either bypass or tilt the scales to their advantage so the other side can't win.

Let's say, hypothetically (and this is a completely unrealistic, hypothetical situation) CCP places population caps on fleets entering a contested area of a region to 200, with some sort of magical mechanic that doesn't allow other blue fleets to enter. You'd think that both sides would be on even footing if they each brought 200; however, the larger force will get around this artificial limit by simply increasing the worth of their ships and their fittings to compensate.

Let me put it like this; TEST Alliance Please Ignore (my alliance) reimburses its pilots. Let's say that, hypothetically, we can field 500 man fleets on our own. Our alliance reimburses its pilots. If we were restricted to 200 people out of that 500, all we would do is adjust our ships fielded. Instead of bringing 500 maelstroms, we'd bring 200 machariels. Instead of having a T2 heat dissipation field, we'd use faction dissipation fields.

The larger entity, without strict regulation, will always find a way to n+1 their opponent, whether it's through "blobbing", fielding more expensive ships, fitting them more expensively, and so on. To restrict this would mean to effectively make EVE no longer a sandbox.

It's simply impractical to attempt to design a system where a smaller group can fight a significantly larger one. The only factor that might change this currently is supercapitals, but the volume of supercapitals tends to favour the larger entities as well. And even then they'll fall into the n+1 issue so many complain about.

To summarize this post curtly: Stop complaining about blobbing. There's no practical way to fix it, it's going to stay around, and it's mindboggling that people still frown upon effective use of resources (in this case people) to win fights. In modern EVE, a fair fight simply means that one side made a mistake in their preparation. They don't really happen anymore.

Sullen Skoung
Posted - 2011.04.12 04:04:00 - [224]
 

Edited by: Sullen Skoung on 12/04/2011 04:13:19
Originally by: LordElfa
Originally by: Sullen Skoung
Originally by: LordElfa
Some of the pathetic attacks at CSM6 in this thread make me want to punch babies.



Thats the effect Goons usually have on ppl

and its not about whove theyve killed...
who am I kidding this HAS to be a troll lol
Good one


No, I'm dead ass serious about this. CSM6 is not the damn Goonswarm. People need to learn to separate the game from real life. In game, the members of CSM6 may play ruthlessly and for keeps, but out of game, many of them are professionals who are taking their roles in the CSM very seriously in order to make this game better. Why can't people see that?!


lol worthy. again, nice troll attempt, but a little too emotional.
I love what they think of US tho:

Quote:
So today we have our first dev blog, where the above is announced, and the attending terrible forum thread full of idiots.


lol we love you guys too

Originally by: LordElfa


No, they voted for them because they trust them


bwa haha HAH HAH HAA HAH HAH
LOL LOL

....
AH HAH HAH

oh man thats the second funniest thing Ive read all day

LordElfa
Gallente
Golden Lyon Warriors
Posted - 2011.04.12 06:35:00 - [225]
 

...and I'm the troll.
Rolling Eyes

Widemouth Deepthroat
Posted - 2011.04.12 06:45:00 - [226]
 

Originally by: LordElfa
...and I'm the troll.
Rolling Eyes



I'd say sycophant.

Pherick Sjang
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 07:43:00 - [227]
 

I've read through every post thus far in this (p. terrible) thread, and it wasn't really until CCP Veritas's comments that I really started to feel hopeful.

I see a lot of hurf blurfing about "Time Dilation is just a bandaid, even CCP Veritas admits it!"

Well, yes. Time Dilation is just a bandaid. It is the bandaid that closes the wound that.. this is a terrible metaphor. It's a small fix addressing a symptom of a bigger problem, but the first step in solving the bigger problem is creating a system where failures are handled tidily rather than in a massive node-crashing disaster.

It's unrealistic to expect CCP to sit down and completely rewrite the game RIGHT NOW TODAY to fix ALL LAG EVERYWHERE FOREVER. But it is completely realistic to work toward addressing the worst symptoms of lag. There will still be an upper limit of ships in system beyond which the time dilation makes things go too slowly to be worth the effort. But we need to stop thinking about this in terms of "making room for 10,000 player fights" and more in terms of "making it so that 500, 600, 1000, 2000 players can fight and it will only be really annoying, and not just a complete disaster."

Once a system for graceful failures is in place, going forward into the future, lag can be more easily addressed at its roots, because things won't burst into flames as soon as person n+1 jumps into the system.

LordElfa
Gallente
Golden Lyon Warriors
Posted - 2011.04.12 07:56:00 - [228]
 

Originally by: Widemouth Deepthroat
Originally by: LordElfa
...and I'm the troll.
Rolling Eyes



I'd say sycophant.


I play EVE, of course I'm a sycophant. Laughing

Dodgy Past
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Posted - 2011.04.12 07:56:00 - [229]
 

Originally by: Mattress Lover
Lag ruins fleet battles and smart operators have used it to their benefit for a long time. Many battles have been won in a completely unfair way, hopefully time dilation will level the playing field. As a 0.0 resident I support CPP 100% in this endeavor.

I knew Mittani would be brilliant as a chairman, so far he's living up to expectations.
LOL, nothing to do with the hard work of the 'useless CSM 5'.

Think I can see where this is heading, free trips to Iceland, no work and claiming credit for those that went before you while maintaining a PR smear campaign.

Sirhan Blixt
Gallente
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 08:09:00 - [230]
 

Originally by: Dodgy Past
LOL, nothing to do with the hard work of the 'useless CSM 5'.

Think I can see where this is heading, free trips to Iceland, no work and claiming credit for those that went before you while maintaining a PR smear campaign.

Troll smarter, not harder.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.12 08:14:00 - [231]
 

Quote:
I can only really speak for myself, but I found some of the CSM5 delegates to be a fantastic resource when it came to finding out how, exactly, lag effects the players. I'm not particularly into the 0.0 game, so that window into the player experience has been of great value to me. It has allowed me to identify problems that didn't appear to be nasty from a purely technical standpoint, but were a major barrier to the player experience. I'm hoping to build upon that relationship with CSM6 - so far so good.

Anyways, I'll cook up a devblog about this all in the near future.


Yes and I am sure CCP greyscale (aka "CSM LALALALALLALALALLALA I dont hear you") would say the same on the forums, and then continue with completely ignoring them...

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.04.12 08:20:00 - [232]
 

Originally by: Furb Killer
Quote:
I can only really speak for myself, but I found some of the CSM5 delegates to be a fantastic resource when it came to finding out how, exactly, lag effects the players. I'm not particularly into the 0.0 game, so that window into the player experience has been of great value to me. It has allowed me to identify problems that didn't appear to be nasty from a purely technical standpoint, but were a major barrier to the player experience. I'm hoping to build upon that relationship with CSM6 - so far so good.

Anyways, I'll cook up a devblog about this all in the near future.


Yes and I am sure CCP greyscale (aka "CSM LALALALALLALALALLALA I dont hear you") would say the same on the forums, and then continue with completely ignoring them...


He did listen to the players. He just didn't happen to agree with you.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.12 08:34:00 - [233]
 

Edited by: Furb Killer on 12/04/2011 08:56:34
If you would have bothered reading my post instead of heading straight for the troll mobile, you would have noticed I was talking about the CSM. You know, the topic here also. Greyscale from CCP who really cares so much about the CSM, did NEVER inform the CSM about his ideas (which i think are ******ed beyond words, but that is irrelevant, even you should agree it is a huge change and it would be kinda logical to talk with the CSM about it). Aditionally the dev blog was timed such that the CSM and others could not ask about it during the 0.0 roundtable.


Edit: btw listening to the few who agree with you and ignoring all others is not the same as listening to your players. And while there are reasons to be in favour of the anomaly nerf, dont tell me you are in favour of it because of the crap he posted in that dev blog, since then I really got bad news for you...

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.04.12 09:50:00 - [234]
 

Originally by: Rex Augustus
That said - Time Dilation is a band aid. Even Veritas admits it's such.

Of course. It's a short/medium term solution, and provides a way to prevent the server from melting. It's good, and it's necessary (and will be a useful part of Carbon), but in the longer term, people will be whining that "We got down to a τ-factor of .1 last night! CCP, fix tau!".

And that longer-term will of course be shorter than anyone expects.

In the long term, the only solution is game-mechanics tweaks that naturally limit engagement sizes to those the servers can reasonably handle at reasonable τ. Time Dilation is one of several tweaks that buys the time to find that solution.

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2011.04.12 10:57:00 - [235]
 

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow

In the long term, the only solution is game-mechanics tweaks that naturally limit engagement sizes to those the servers can reasonably handle at reasonable τ. Time Dilation is one of several tweaks that buys the time to find that solution.


As far as I'm concerned I have no interest in limiting engagement size in any way, shape or form. Making them "not a requirement" and finding ways not to make smaller engagements systematically escalate is more on my agenda...

Either way, there's no discussion time dilitation would be a good thing.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.12 11:03:00 - [236]
 

Edited by: Furb Killer on 12/04/2011 11:03:54
Which end up to be pretty much the same, since Trebor said naturally limitting the engagement sizes, not some kind of hardcap as what your version of what he said implies.

Liandra Xi
Amarr
The New Era
C0NVICTED
Posted - 2011.04.12 11:08:00 - [237]
 

Edited by: Liandra Xi on 12/04/2011 11:11:37
CSM6 = Best CSM

aka I fully endorse this service/product.

Loving Mittens work as Chairman so far, lets see if he and the other CSM can actually turn an epic idea into reality or not though.

edit: its impossible to fix lag forever, its a constant race against the hardware, etc... that will never be won, so this is the next best solution i've ever heard of that will actually allow epic fights AND make it fair for everyone in the fight. bring it on.

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.04.12 11:11:00 - [238]
 

Edited by: Mynxee on 12/04/2011 11:13:34
Originally by: Fuujin
Originally by: Mynxee

The CSM backlog exists because one of the defined roles of the CSM is to vote on proposals raised by themselves or players. The ones that pass go into the backlog. They are not "rotting" there, they are simply stored there as potential ideas for future development/game changes. Either due to championing by CSM or being picked up by a CCP sprint team during a backlog review, some items get development resources assigned.

There will never come a time when every CSM item in the backlog is done, even if CCP were to stop right now and work on no other thing until the end of time. Why? Because items in the backlog are not evaluated by CSM at voting time based on what has been passed previously. Each idea is considered on its own merits. Therefore, many of the CSM items currently in the backlog aren't necessarily compatible with each other or what's implemented in the game right now.

It might be a thought for some CSM (maybe CSM6?) to review the backlogged CSM items with the goal of identifying obsolete items for removal or categorization as "Won'ts" in the MuSCOW scheme (used by CCP to categorize "stories" in its backlog). Doing so would likely reduce the actual number of items wanting dev love. At least this is possible now, since CCP finally tagged all the CSM backlogged items at CSM5's urging; until then, you couldn't query the backlog and pull out a list of just CSM items. I have sometimes wonder how much that has influenced the attention so many items got during CSM5's term.




Which just goes to my point. The CSM needs to be more than an Assembly Hall Bad Idea Aggregator; it needs to evaluate and apply some critical thinking to the ideas it advances. Much like the "coming soon" page that used to be in the patch section of the website, you can very easily load up on "sounds cool" ideas and never get anywhere--which not coincidentally is what has happened with almost every other CSM. Aside from advising CCP on a few issues that were already underway (sov revamp comes to mind) and getting some low-hanging fruit through (learning skills, learning queue) there is little obvious "we did this" evidence of the CSM ever doing anything than serving as a PR setpiece for CCP.

The backlog and how best to handle it, as Mittani and others mentioned during the campaign, is probably going to be a major focus during CSM6.


There has been plenty of critical thinking applied to proposals by most delegates in the process of choosing which to raise and then during discussions in the group when a proposal is raised for a vote. That's not to say there isn't room for improvement to the process, but the challenge will be to make it better while continuing to keep players in the loop and provide them with a structured, publicly visible method for submitting their ideas to the CSM queue.


Liosa Rearl
Caldari
The Lost Legion
Bang Bang You're Dead
Posted - 2011.04.12 11:25:00 - [239]
 

To the current delegates on CSM6

I pledge support to your cause as you guys write sense. Regardless of other's perceptions, you guys seem to be doing what you said you would do. I hope that many more of my fellow pilots will support your cause.

if 300000 pilots screamed about the same thing and were united on something, CCP would move. CSM6 has made an example and focused on one object.

Now if the rest you you ******s out there whining about goonswarm this and goonswarm that would just stfu, this thread would be a lot cleaner. I don't like goonswarm either but the CSM is not freaking goonswarm.

Sheesh.

Good luck CSM6

Razzor Death
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 11:51:00 - [240]
 

It is very surprising to see a PL dude trolling so hard in this thread The current CSM is simply trying to make sure this does not happen again.

Everyone should watch that video, what do you do in this situation ? All the capitals you see literally slaughtered where just looking at a black screen. Now one might say 'it is their fault for playing in the lag', but I would hope most people have enough commen sense to realise that if they did not fight the only other option would be to roll over and surrender your space that many people have bled hours of hard work and many months of their life to secure and maintain.

2 years it takes to skill into one of those ships and they cost up to 60bill plus properly fitted. And people in highsec cry about losing a hulk to hulkageddon, 200 mill and 3 months training.

Food for thought maybe.


Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 : last (11)

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