open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked Summit Topic: Ship Balance
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (13)

Author Topic

Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor
The Seventh Day
Posted - 2011.04.23 14:10:00 - [91]
 

Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 23/04/2011 14:16:19
Originally by: MeBiatch
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian
Long Winded request to boost dreads


I second that... remember what happened to the moros? instead of ccp making other dreads better the made them all stink...

but my idea to make dreads better might not jive with you...

i want tech II dreads! dreads were the first capital ship and they should have a tech II variant by now...

Basically thier Tech II bonus would be 1. increase to damage
2. increase to HP
3. roll bonus would be to half the time and cost for siege mode...
I would put the cost for each one of these babies around 4.5 billion...
-------------------------------------------------------------



Tech II dreds?

Quoting what is probably the stupidest post in this thread, being that you could just buff the current dreds just like CCP buffed motherships. If more intelligent people posted more realistic and well thought out ideas, then just maybe CCP would be doing more to better the game instead of screwing it up with each passing expansion. But instead you get crap like this... Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.



It would make far more sense to introduce a faction dred AFTER current capital ships were rebalanced for at least a year.



MeBiatch
Posted - 2011.04.23 15:03:00 - [92]
 

Originally by: Eternum Praetorian
Wine and cheese rage




i told you it would not jive with youRolling Eyes

you could just boost regular dreads...
but dreads should not be on par with SC or titans...

how much does a dread cost? how much does a sc or titan?
you can dock a dread you cant with sc or titan...

all you want is the game to go back to dreads online (which it was for a while) i remember something like 500 dreads on field at one point...

Though i do like the idea of faction dreads i dont think ccp will be doing them any time soon (maybe?) cuss we would have seen one with incursion... but what we got is a pirate faction SC... so chances are more faction SC's are in our future...

as for TECH II dreads... you might think its a stupid idea... but i dont... Tech II is never a stupid idea...

that would be like saying oh man there is this BS and its soo much more uber then my caracal... lets boost the hell out of caracal but keep the price the same? and you are calling me stupid? stop drinking the yellow Listerine bossWink

Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari
draketrain
Posted - 2011.04.23 15:14:00 - [93]
 

1) drake is fine. it just happens to have abilities that are good for medium size fleets atm. not to mention 90% of players can fly a drake.

2) artillery was buffed for very little reason. and now the alpha is just mad.

3) angel ships.

4) REMOVAL OF SPACE PRIESTS. I think going towards mainstream MMO way where you got healers was very bad decision. Not to mention it made carriers less useful in process. I think this is also aftermath for needless buff for logistics back in time.

5) Gallente ships are fine. You could talk about balancing hybrid ammo and oomphing railguns whatever. Which brings up suckiness of caldari hybrid boats.

Jerick Ludhowe
Southern Cross Empire
Flying Dangerous
Posted - 2011.04.23 15:28:00 - [94]
 

1.) Remove the cap penalty from the MWD and replace existing MWD cap bonuses with something more suitable. I believe that meta level should also have a more significant impact on sig res penalty, and cap usage.

2.) Decrease the fitting requirements of Medium and Large Blasters. This is essential for fixing some core Gallente issues that revolve around the requirement of fitting large numbers of high grid and cpu modules such as plates, cap boosters, armor reppers and MWDs.

3.) Change to penalty for active armor rep rigs.

4.) Give Interceptors their roll back, nerf the dram.

Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor
The Seventh Day
Posted - 2011.04.23 15:28:00 - [95]
 

Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 23/04/2011 15:29:17
Originally by: MeBiatch
Idea is not just crap whole train of thought is garbage


Fixing existing stuff does not = adding new things.
You must fix what currently exists first.

It is sad that I need to type out and remind people of what should be simple commonsense. Feed your brain because it seems to be dieing a slow death.

MeBiatch
Posted - 2011.04.23 15:47:00 - [96]
 

Originally by: Eternum Praetorian
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 23/04/2011 15:29:17
Originally by: MeBiatch
Idea is aweome and i Eternum wish i thought of it


Fixing existing stuff does not = adding new things.
You must fix what currently exists first.

It is sad that I am incontinent. I must stop drinking so much wine as its causes me to whine way to muchEmbarassed.


1st... dreads are fine for the cost/risk if anything the seige counter should be reduced... 1.1 billion is not that expensive especially with alliance reimbursement and insurance...

i think you are just butthurt that you dont have a titan and are upset it can one shot you...

but if you want a ship that has more meat on its bones and is able to do more dps and still dock/ cost half that of a sc... then a tech II dread is what you are looking for...

IMO i will always advocate to adding more flavour to pvp then just making things more vanilla...

Windjammer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.23 16:05:00 - [97]
 

Reinstate the Moros drone bonus. It was dropped from 50% damage per level of skill training to 20%. This crippling nerf was done without advance warning and didnít even make it into the patch notes until a couple days after the release of the patch.

Introduce a cruise missile version of Stealth Bombers. Keep the torpedo one currently being used, but bring back the older cruise missile version with its bonuses. The current models are great in 0.0, but not as useful as the cruise missile version in high sec.

Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor
The Seventh Day
Posted - 2011.04.23 16:08:00 - [98]
 

Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 23/04/2011 16:09:24
TBH we can go on and on and turn this into an nonconstructive troll thread. But I won't bother doing that...




Because the important thing to remember here is that the odds of your ******ed idea being implemented in game is next to none. So I am quite content with letting you go on and on and on about... LOL... Tech II dreds in place of a broad spanning capital ship rebalancing across the board (for all races)


Wow...
Just wow... LOL



MeBiatch
Posted - 2011.04.23 16:36:00 - [99]
 

Originally by: Eternum Praetorian
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 23/04/2011 16:09:24
TBH we can go on and on and turn this into an nonconstructive troll thread. But I won't bother doing that...




Because the important thing to remember here is that the odds of your ******ed idea being implemented in game is next to none. So I am quite content with letting you go on and on and on about... LOL... Tech II dreds in place of a broad spanning capital ship rebalancing across the board (for all races)


Wow...
Just wow... LOL





yeah this is starting to feel like a tennis match... i am nedal and you can be the other guy that keeps on loosingWinkoh yeah his name is federerWink

sorry man this aint WOW... this is EVEONLINE...

why you would think a ship that costs 1/10 of a sc or even 1/40 of a titan should be on par is beyond me...
though a sc rebalance is needed as the nyx is teh win atm and the minnie one needs major love...

the only answer other then nerfing the hell out of titans and sc's and in the process reducing thier cost so that people will still fly them (or boosting dreads to the point where its 2008 again and all we see is dreads online) would be introducing tech II dreads into the mix...
Even Though CCP has not been talked about it before i would not be so confident that it wont ever happen in the future...

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.04.23 19:04:00 - [100]
 

Edited by: Liang Nuren on 23/04/2011 19:03:47
Originally by: Laechyd Eldgorn

4) REMOVAL OF SPACE PRIESTS. I think going towards mainstream MMO way where you got healers was very bad decision. Not to mention it made carriers less useful in process. I think this is also aftermath for needless buff for logistics back in time.



Anything that deviates from every single person stacking on as much EHP and DPS as possible is obviously bad for the game. Rolling Eyes

Sanicity darx
Posted - 2011.04.23 19:04:00 - [101]
 

I think a few extra high slots on dreads with the option of capital sized nos/neut (with siege bonus) would add flavor to dreads.

or tech 2 dreads....

Sephiroth CloneVII
Posted - 2011.04.23 21:14:00 - [102]
 

In addition to balancing the races (which is related to weapons, the most important component of the ship), eliminating the teir system in another topic is a good idea for accomplishing balance and having more use of ships that normally are the odd things that no intelligent people would play with. Ie Ferox compared to drake.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.04.24 02:29:00 - [103]
 


Well, for starters, I would say that the "bounding spheres" of all ships would need to become much larger, but the "bounce coefficient" needs to become far more lenient in the "outer layers", and the way a small bounding sphere interacts with a large one needs to be readjusted (so, for instance, a small ship could have far less of an effect on a large ship's trajectory, but the small ship should be able to "intrude" in the large ship's sphere to some degree without being bounced back like mad)... and while inside a POS shield, all of them would be significantly reduced (optionally, also reduce speed when too close together, but only while inside a shield AND when too close to another ship).

Basically, a sort of enforced "collision avoidance" ship navigation automated subroutine (if you want to consider the RP implications), that would work from a practical (gameplay) standpoint as a very soft anti-blob technique, which would also have an impact on the way bumping works.

So, say, if there's a bunch of supercaps, they would tend to drift apart to a relatively large distance unless all ships are actively trying to move towards the same point, and it should be harder and harder to "clump together" the closer they get (and the more of them are around).
However, at the same time, battleships should be able to move with relative impunity where supercap movement would be already somewhat restricted, cruisers could flock together relatively closely or even fly by the barely moving and still attempting to approach one another supercaps, whereas frigates would hardly feel any difference from the current model.

In other words, ships should act far less like giant rubber balls with a relatively clear size... and instead act slightly more like a bunch of objects charged with the same sign of static electricity (but the "strength" of the interaction would be smaller the larger the sig difference would be).

J Kunjeh
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.24 10:51:00 - [104]
 

Originally by: Akita T

Basically, a sort of enforced "collision avoidance" ship navigation automated subroutine (if you want to consider the RP implications), that would work from a practical (gameplay) standpoint as a very soft anti-blob technique, which would also have an impact on the way bumping works.



Interesting idea...I like it. Still trying to wrap my imagination around it more, but it seems workable and a good way of helping the blobbing issues.

Ai Mei
Starfish Operating Syndicate
Posted - 2011.04.24 16:12:00 - [105]
 

Originally by: Windjammer
Reinstate the Moros drone bonus. It was dropped from 50% damage per level of skill training to 20%. This crippling nerf was done without advance warning and didnít even make it into the patch notes until a couple days after the release of the patch.

Introduce a cruise missile version of Stealth Bombers. Keep the torpedo one currently being used, but bring back the older cruise missile version with its bonuses. The current models are great in 0.0, but not as useful as the cruise missile version in high sec.



No, it was only announced at fanfest infront of 300 people and put on youtube 3 months before it was implemented.

Sul Glass
Posted - 2011.04.24 19:11:00 - [106]
 

Buff the Legion. (Please dear God)

No one-Mid-slot ships.

Co Ops cloak for BO, so we can get into 0.0 but limit number of BOs per alliance to stop huge BO blobs appearing from nowhere.

Time limit the cov ops cloak to 15 mins before a reset to nerf AFK cloakers and make cloak game play a bit more challenging.


Thank you, Sul.

Mr DurkaDur
Posted - 2011.04.24 19:20:00 - [107]
 

Edited by: Mr DurkaDur on 24/04/2011 19:21:34
Ok, so I am seeing a lot of back and forth development of ideas related to fix this, fix that, kind of ideas which are mostly really good I think. But would I be wrong to say that most of us here think that ship balancing in general for CCP should work like this?

1.) Not making ships obsolete nor over-shadowing their similar counterparts; every ship has a specific purpose.
2.) When buffing / nerfing ships as needed, be sure to consider how it affects its role; making sure those purposes can not be done better by any other ship.

Anyone think this is reasonable?

personal note: I still want to see dreads with more turrets, also HAPPY EASTER!

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.04.24 21:47:00 - [108]
 

Originally by: Akita T

Well, for starters, I would say that the "bounding spheres" of all ships would need to become much larger, but the "bounce coefficient" needs to become far more lenient in the "outer layers", and the way a small bounding sphere interacts with a large one needs to be readjusted (so, for instance, a small ship could have far less of an effect on a large ship's trajectory, but the small ship should be able to "intrude" in the large ship's sphere to some degree without being bounced back like mad)... and while inside a POS shield, all of them would be significantly reduced (optionally, also reduce speed when too close together, but only while inside a shield AND when too close to another ship).

Basically, a sort of enforced "collision avoidance" ship navigation automated subroutine (if you want to consider the RP implications), that would work from a practical (gameplay) standpoint as a very soft anti-blob technique, which would also have an impact on the way bumping works.

So, say, if there's a bunch of supercaps, they would tend to drift apart to a relatively large distance unless all ships are actively trying to move towards the same point, and it should be harder and harder to "clump together" the closer they get (and the more of them are around).
However, at the same time, battleships should be able to move with relative impunity where supercap movement would be already somewhat restricted, cruisers could flock together relatively closely or even fly by the barely moving and still attempting to approach one another supercaps, whereas frigates would hardly feel any difference from the current model.

In other words, ships should act far less like giant rubber balls with a relatively clear size... and instead act slightly more like a bunch of objects charged with the same sign of static electricity (but the "strength" of the interaction would be smaller the larger the sig difference would be).



way to go poaching peoples ideas off them btw ----> LOL!

and the idea was shot down pretty fast because of how laughable it is, yes i can understand that trying to get the figures correct may make it slightly less of an argument but its not like fleetwarps even takes those things into consideration.. all ull do is make a blob auto deblob once out of warp.. which tbh will only add to its defences.

no need to actively deblob so we're not all a massive concentrated target for bombers guys.. the server does it for us! woohoo!

GeeShizzle MacCloud
Caldari
Posted - 2011.04.24 21:50:00 - [109]
 

Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud on 24/04/2011 21:51:21
im reposting my first post as some people are asking for a more generalised balancing set of ideas so i thought id offer you lot this...

Originally by: GeeShizzle MacCloud
i'd like to reference something that eve facebook page brought me to in terms of ship balancing and that is this

there needs to be a better spread between ships of the same class, although i agree in part with a bit of ship type grouping and racial grouping in this area i don't believe certain ships should have such an unquestionable dominance over another.

It makes little real world sense either in terms of industry. I'd much rather see ships more closely balanced and then shifted around constantly in the form of updates, improvements and upgrades to simulate shipyard industry rivalry and competitiveness.

this does NOT mean a constant chain of buffing, what might buff one aspect of a ship could nerf another aspect, which may be buffed in another update... providing a detrimental double nerf to another aspect. keeping the level of buffs and nerfs equal and constantly shifting will create dynamicism and a constantly changing combat situation.

i would also add with the now 64 bit database it could be made possible to opt a ship out of the update chain, preserving a particularly successful update thus making them extremely valuable commodities.


love some criticism on this.. be ultra harsh so long as u spank me afterwards! LOL!!

Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor
The Seventh Day
Posted - 2011.04.26 16:13:00 - [110]
 

Originally by: Akita T

Well, for starters, I would say that the "bounding spheres" of all ships would need to become much larger, but the "bounce coefficient" needs to become far more lenient in the "outer layers", and the way a small bounding sphere interacts with a large one needs to be readjusted (so, for instance, a small ship could have far less of an effect on a large ship's trajectory, but the small ship should be able to "intrude" in the large ship's sphere to some degree without being bounced back like mad)... and while inside a POS shield, all of them would be significantly reduced (optionally, also reduce speed when too close together, but only while inside a shield AND when too close to another ship).

Basically, a sort of enforced "collision avoidance" ship navigation automated subroutine (if you want to consider the RP implications), that would work from a practical (gameplay) standpoint as a very soft anti-blob technique, which would also have an impact on the way bumping works.

So, say, if there's a bunch of supercaps, they would tend to drift apart to a relatively large distance unless all ships are actively trying to move towards the same point, and it should be harder and harder to "clump together" the closer they get (and the more of them are around).
However, at the same time, battleships should be able to move with relative impunity where supercap movement would be already somewhat restricted, cruisers could flock together relatively closely or even fly by the barely moving and still attempting to approach one another supercaps, whereas frigates would hardly feel any difference from the current model.

In other words, ships should act far less like giant rubber balls with a relatively clear size... and instead act slightly more like a bunch of objects charged with the same sign of static electricity (but the "strength" of the interaction would be smaller the larger the sig difference would be).




That is actually a pretty awesome idea Shocked

Mortimer Civeri
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2011.04.26 18:42:00 - [111]
 

Edited by: Mortimer Civeri on 26/04/2011 20:35:04
I find it odd that the shortest ranged guns, aparently, go on the slowest, least maneuverable ships in the game.

Really when was the last time someone saw a blaster ship outside of an undock camp/gank, or PvE?

EDIT: I do like the idea I saw earlier where blasters got a boost to alpha/lower ROF, and rails got a boost to ROF/lower alpha. Still doesn't adress the fact that Gallente ships are slow and ponderous, and the first thing a new Gallente pilot should do is train Minmatar.

Opertone
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2011.04.26 21:46:00 - [112]
 

i wonder why caldari gun boats are even suckier than gallente gun boats.

when was the last time you saw ferox/rokh outside of your ship preview window?

crimson fire
Posted - 2011.04.27 11:36:00 - [113]
 

Originally by: Opertone
i wonder why caldari gun boats are even suckier than gallente gun boats.

when was the last time you saw ferox/rokh outside of your ship preview window?


Because hybrids F..king suck? At least caldari got missiles!! Wawnna trade?

True Trade
Posted - 2011.04.27 11:52:00 - [114]
 

Take a look at the word hybrid. It means a melt between to systems.

Lets go from there...

Why not let ammo deside how the weapon works. I a player loads rail ammo the gun will fire as a rail. If the player loads blaster ammo it will work as a blaster.

2 guns in one. A hybrid.


Both rail and blasters suck so much that combined they just about make a decent weapon.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.27 13:03:00 - [115]
 

Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/04/2011 13:06:22
Just nerf supercaps. Dont boost dreads, dreads are balanced, the issue is with supers, they need to be nerfed. Sure you can boost dreads to deal with them, then boost carriers to keep them balanced, followed by BS, BC, cruisers, etc. Or you just nerf supers and are ready with it.

Quote:
all you want is the game to go back to dreads online (which it was for a while) i remember something like 500 dreads on field at one point...


That is imposssible. Only way that used to be possible was AOE doomsday. Right now the ideal 500 men fleet would probably be 475 supers + 25 dictors, and besides bringing more of the same, the only counters is thousands of non-supers, not to mention how many subcaps you would need.
Now with your theoretical fleet of 500 dreads (lets say again 475 dreads + 25 dictors). The result against an equally sized BS group would be horrible, for the dreads. Because dreads are completely useless against subcaps they are nicely balanced, so also dont start ****ing with moros drone damage bonus, that was a stupid bonus in the first place and should never come back (and yes only dread i fly is a moros).

Mortimer Civeri
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2011.04.27 14:16:00 - [116]
 

I found this in another thread, and it illustrates the root causes of why Gallente fail at anything but ganking.
Quote:

Once upon a time the blaster, like the laser before it, was king in the DPS stakes and the gank boat of choice. In many ways, this is still the same. If you can get someone pinned and are planning to warp a group in on them with a view to killing them before their friends can come, a blaster boat is the ship you want. But theres more to fighting that ganks (believe it or not) and this is where the blaster boats began to have problems as along came a number of changes to the game.

First I remember was the hit point buff. This buff radically skewed the advantages of buffer tanks over active tanks. Blasters still did ok in this environment because of their relatively high DPS, but became even more the glass cannon than they had been previously.

The problem with the rise of the buffer tank is that gal boats are balanced to the greater part on being active tanked (indicated by their racial tanking bonus). Since active tanks (particularly mini and gal boats) fold under fire from multiple ships (they work for 1v1s and thatís about it, give or take a few specific situations), blaster boats are too cap fragile for the long fight and suffer from tight fitting constraints meaning in order to fit reppers (which have significantly higher fitting requirements than an equivalent plate) and a cap injector blaster boats could barely fit guns, it became better to buffer tank the blaster boats, more hit points (a repper has to run for around 90 seconds before it can rep the hit points in a single plate of similar size), less cap problems and more damage (can fit bigger guns).

This wrecked their base agility and speed Ė if you assume Amarr will be buffer tanked with lots of plates and Gal will be active tanked with no plates, Gal are on the whole, faster than Amarrian ships once fit. Minmatar ships will always outrun them, but at that time had to come in close to do the damage needed to overpower an active tanked ship as otherwise theyíd be in deep fall off, but this ended with the TE boost to fall off. The overall damage rise of other races weapon systems marginalised the DPS advantage of blasters, requiring them to fit a significant number of mag stabs in order to maintain. The Web and Scram changes are well documented (particularly their effect on tracking), so Iíll not truck them out again, but this was another nail in the coffin, especially if you consider the need to dual prop a blaster boat in order to maintain effectiveness in range Ė frankly, there is just no room on the ships for active tanks, significant numbers of damage mods, cap injectors, dual prop, web, scram and guns in the PG/CPU levels of the ships, never mind slot layout, so put together the concept doesnít work even if the component parts werenít so broken in and of themselves.

Whats the answer? I really donít know. Too many changes have come together to bring this issue about for there to be one simple solution I suspect. Doing something with active tanks and not balancing ships with them in mind unless they are viable would be a start. Over the years, people have suggested a form of damage mitigation based on too many targets shooting the same ship. Not been a fan of it myself as I canít picture how it would work, but if something convincing could be made, it might help the active tank to work.
Re-looking at some of the attempts to boost other weapons (pulse laser tracking and the tracking enhancer boost to falloff for example since the resistance reduction and changes to ammo sorted much of their issues out).
Replace the MWD (which was useful once, but not so much now) and active tank bonuses for something else Ė web strength (not range) really is the logical one, but eats into the pirate ships. Maybe a scram range to help them tag kiting ships and force them either further into falloff or to come in close..?

Theron Gyrow
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2011.04.28 10:37:00 - [117]
 

Edited by: Theron Gyrow on 30/04/2011 15:01:51
Current balance issues from my point of view:
- Hybrids. They are just sad.
- Gallente ships. Pretty much likewise. Especially Eos.
- Capital balance. Supercarriers are OP, dreads are crap. Archon is also too good compared to other carriers.
- Active tanking is _rather_ marginal outside PvE.
- Rig penalties. Completely unbalanced.
- Drone balance. Amarr light/medium/heavy drones are total crap; their sentries are fine, though.
- Black ops and EAF could use some boosting, Angel ships some nerfing.
- Frigate/cruiser/battlecruiser tier system is outdated; it just leaves most ship hulls unused. Augoror, anyone?
- Claw's locking range could use some boosting.
- Oneiros could use some love. All other logistics have a niche, Oneiros doesn't really.
- The new faction cruisers are rather unbalanced. Compare Navy Augoror with Navy Exequror...
- Damps could use some looking at. Was the original way of resolving them too calculation-intensive? Currently, the higher the bonus is, the more effective additional bonuses are, which means that on non-absolutely-maxed hulls/skills/rigs they are way underwhelming. They used to be that the higher the original effectiveness, the less the additional bonuses mattered...

Alghara
Posted - 2011.04.28 14:43:00 - [118]
 

Tracking Disruptor it's a joke now.

The optimal script is only usefull against Amarr ( make the bonus on optimal and falloff).

the tracking script don't works on medium autocannon (to much tracking).

Try to use the sentinel with 2 tracking disruptor againt a huricanne with 425 ...

Machariel is clearly overpower like Dramiel.

Hybrid need love.

To much tracking with the Large autocannon and medium range ammo ( better than medium pulse laser ???).



Time Funnel
Posted - 2011.04.28 22:08:00 - [119]
 

Originally by: Eternum Praetorian
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 23/04/2011 16:09:24


Because the important thing to remember here is that the odds of your ******ed idea being implemented in game is next to none.





Someone here is a bit of a pessimist. Guess who?

Time Funnel
Posted - 2011.04.28 22:12:00 - [120]
 

Originally by: Opertone
i wonder why caldari gun boats are even suckier than gallente gun boats.

when was the last time you saw ferox/rokh outside of your ship preview window?


Rails and blasters need a buff. Don't think anyone is arguing too hard with you


Pages: first : previous : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (13)

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