open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: CSM May summit - meeting minutes are out
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

Author Topic

Written Word
Written Word's Tax Haven
Posted - 2011.07.13 00:05:00 - [91]
 

A company that brags non stop on how big it is getting, complains constantly about the lack of resources?

Question

Originally by: CCP Soundwave


It's actually the other way around. We've been heavily borrowing resources from projects like WoD for EVE.


You like when people call bull**** on you.

That is bull****. Pure and simple.

Dolm De'Mourne
Posted - 2011.07.13 00:29:00 - [92]
 

Originally by: The Mittani

Screw your class 1-4 ABC.



Considering even those daytrippers are subject to all the dangers of null without local, why shouldn't they have access to ABC ores? Also given that some poeple do live in those systems, should they have their self sufficiency reduced while you ask to have nullsec more self sustained?

If you are of the opinion that this causes a detrimental influx of minerals, have you thought to use the means already available to you to control it (WH Piracy/Ganking/etc)?

Smoking Blunts
Posted - 2011.07.13 00:35:00 - [93]
 

Originally by: The Mittani
Originally by: Cmdr Stargazer
Quote:
The CSM, with the exception of two members, is irked at the idea of high value ores being mined in low-end wormholes distorting the market. CCP Zulu mentioned that he considers this ‘******ed’ and that this will be looked into. In Class 5 or 6 wormholes the position is more nuanced, and the CSM acknowledged that these minerals could be used for local production, and that they are too far from the market to distort it.


Then the CSM members who are irked + Zulu are idiots. The risk/reward/PITA for WH mining is pretty high in lower class systems. Sure you can mine in a C1 WH but you have to have paranoia trained to V. Constantly dscan'ing for scan probes, no local, mining into a jetcan, jumping to a hauler, storing ore in a POS, making a stupid amount of trips to get ore out to refine at a decent rate(POS refining arrays are a joke).

"Daytrippers" can only jump a retreiver sized ship into the C1 WH, and a T1 Industrial to haul. The more mass you jump, the more unstable the WH gets. Translation: you are time limited on how much time/m3 you can actually get. Logisitcally and risk wise it hardly makes it worth it some times. The m3 of ore generated out of WH that actually makes it to market is likely very low(thank you CSM folks who asked for hard facts). Big alliance nullsec residents seem butthurt because somebody else has the ability to get at ABC besides them and their bots.

Also add to all of that the low spawn rate of ore sites(or any damn sites lately) and the fact that WH ore sites despawn unlike the ones in nullsec fortress systems. I hardly believe this is something that needs fixing/nerfing.

Will wait for CSM feedback after they get their requested hard data before resorting to 'Leave Britney Alone!' type screaming.




Screw your class 1-4 ABC.



its a good job hilmar knows teh real value of the csm

Quote:
While Hilmar did say he valued many types of CSM feedback, he felt that the most valuable role the CSM could provide, in terms of development, was in more of a refining role than a high-level design role.

Siiee
Recycled Heroes
Posted - 2011.07.13 01:36:00 - [94]
 

Originally by: Dolm De'Mourne
Originally by: The Mittani

Screw your class 1-4 ABC.



Considering even those daytrippers are subject to all the dangers of null without local, why shouldn't they have access to ABC ores?


This. Risks in WHs are even higher than nullsec, even in the lowliest C1. No automated system-wide intelligence gathering, no jump bridges (lol). I would say that lower tier WHs are even more dangerous than the mid tier ones because you literally are 1 jump away from an entire region full of potential hostiles.

The risk and the reward is there, how do you possibly justify that position as anything but self interest?

Black Dranzer
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.13 01:54:00 - [95]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
It's actually the other way around. We've been heavily borrowing resources from projects like WoD for EVE.


Herpus Derpus


Besides that, the meeting minutes were interesting, if a little lackluster in places. It'd be nice if ship balance had more than one guy devoted to fixing four ships a year, but frankly at this point I'll take what I can get.

The noise about "something" happening to local/intel gathering was particularly interesting. Also, engine trails. You know the first T2 ship I learned to fly was a crow. I learned to fly it specifically because I wanted a ship with super-long engine trails. The idea of a super API that lets you interact with the game is fascinating, but also worrying when you consider some of the implications. The idea of massive PLEX stockpiles is also concerning.

UI improvements are good. Industry is good. Nullsec is good. Lots of good. Surprisingly little bad, with the exception of "art bottlenecks everything" and the general uncomfortable stench of Aurum lingering over the whole thing.

Looking forward to seeing how all this plays out.

Raid'En
Posted - 2011.07.13 02:10:00 - [96]
 

Edited by: Raid''En on 13/07/2011 02:10:20
Originally by: Siiee

This. Risks in WHs are even higher than nullsec, even in the lowliest C1. No automated system-wide intelligence gathering, no jump bridges (lol). I would say that lower tier WHs are even more dangerous than the mid tier ones because you literally are 1 jump away from an entire region full of potential hostiles.

The risk and the reward is there, how do you possibly justify that position as anything but self interest?

class 1 also have the advantage of having to move all that with a simple industrial as you can't use an orca.
ah wait, on nullsec they don't use orca, they have jump freighters

for security issues class 5 and 6 are the safer for these ops, given they are pretty hidden, and that their size means bigger corps, and so bigger online intel + defensive fleet

Andrea Griffin
Posted - 2011.07.13 02:24:00 - [97]
 

Originally by: Kerrisone
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Kerrisone
Again there is money for WOD/DUST but not for EVE, thanks again CCP.
It's actually the other way around. We've been heavily borrowing resources from projects like WoD for EVE.
Which are funded by EVE's income, and put into EVE to offset the costs of development while having us test that technology for you.
Plus borrowing, plus venture capital. Also, using Eve as a test bed for the new technology that will be used in other games is a smart use of resources. Not only does Eve benefit, but they end up with proven, tested code as well.

But whatever. Haters that haven't ever held a real job gonna hate.

Zleon Leigh
Posted - 2011.07.13 02:43:00 - [98]
 

Originally by: Haulie Berry
Edited by: Haulie Berry on 12/07/2011 20:52:02
Quote:
Big alliance nullsec residents seem butthurt because somebody else has the ability to get at ABC besides them and their bots.


No joke. A quadruple amputee could count on their fingers the number of complaints I've seen about wormholes having ABCs.

This pretty clearly seems like an instance of the CSM looking after the interests of their respective alliances.


Agreed - the complete CSM member alliance self interest evident in the summary is amazing.

The poor attitude by the CSM for a minor scheduling/coordination mishap was inexcusable. I thought adults had been elected, not children. They must be pretty spoiled kids - nothing has ever gone wrong in their lives.

Summary shows that the CSM/CCP summits are just a bunch of BS, especially given the incredibly large differences between the minutes and the releases since this meeting. Sounds like a 6 month waste of effort on CCP's part or a total snow job.

Before the minutes release, I was dismayed with the plot given here for all time: Downhill all the way I thought I had joined something that was growing. Given the summary - now I know why EVE is dieing.

mkint
Posted - 2011.07.13 02:52:00 - [99]
 

Originally by: The Mittani
Originally by: Cmdr Stargazer
Quote:
The CSM, with the exception of two members, is irked at the idea of high value ores being mined in low-end wormholes distorting the market. CCP Zulu mentioned that he considers this ‘******ed’ and that this will be looked into. In Class 5 or 6 wormholes the position is more nuanced, and the CSM acknowledged that these minerals could be used for local production, and that they are too far from the market to distort it.


Then the CSM members who are irked + Zulu are idiots. The risk/reward/PITA for WH mining is pretty high in lower class systems. Sure you can mine in a C1 WH but you have to have paranoia trained to V. Constantly dscan'ing for scan probes, no local, mining into a jetcan, jumping to a hauler, storing ore in a POS, making a stupid amount of trips to get ore out to refine at a decent rate(POS refining arrays are a joke).

"Daytrippers" can only jump a retreiver sized ship into the C1 WH, and a T1 Industrial to haul. The more mass you jump, the more unstable the WH gets. Translation: you are time limited on how much time/m3 you can actually get. Logisitcally and risk wise it hardly makes it worth it some times. The m3 of ore generated out of WH that actually makes it to market is likely very low(thank you CSM folks who asked for hard facts). Big alliance nullsec residents seem butthurt because somebody else has the ability to get at ABC besides them and their bots.

Also add to all of that the low spawn rate of ore sites(or any damn sites lately) and the fact that WH ore sites despawn unlike the ones in nullsec fortress systems. I hardly believe this is something that needs fixing/nerfing.

Will wait for CSM feedback after they get their requested hard data before resorting to 'Leave Britney Alone!' type screaming.




Screw your class 1-4 ABC.



Mittens is like a dev... he doesn't play EVE.

BTW, mittens is part of an alliance who's primary purpose in EVE has always been to ruin it. There isn't a grain of salt big enough to handle what he says.

Abdiel Kavash
Caldari
Paladin Order
Fidelas Constans
Posted - 2011.07.13 03:52:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: Zleon Leigh
Before the minutes release, I was dismayed with the plot given here for all time: Downhill all the way I thought I had joined something that was growing. Given the summary - now I know why EVE is dieing.



Let me guess, another person who reads the graph left-to-right.

Erik Finnegan
Gallente
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
Posted - 2011.07.13 04:03:00 - [101]
 

Originally by: The Mittani
Screw your class 1-4 ABC.

Sounds much like using insults to cover up missing sovereignty in a discussion.

Low WH ABC mining is only mildly profitable. Just enough so that enough fools dare do it and populate them. Give us stats or leave it as it is. It's the balancing process, stupid.


If POSes cannot be fixed, then finally turn high-sec conflict into a viable mid-game competition. That iteration will mainly need mechanics, not ART. Mid-game features make more players in EVE happy than end-game. Profit.

Xira Firestar
Posted - 2011.07.13 04:52:00 - [102]
 

Quote:
The CSM repeated the concern, raised at previous summits, that too many resources were devoted to "new and shiny". The question of whether, after the initial development of Incarna and Establishments, some of those resources could be redirected towards fixing existing features was raised.

CCP replied that a significant portion of the resources used to develop Incarna have been borrowed from other projects, or are being used to develop infrastructure that has broader application than just Incarna.
...
It was also pointed out that if the subscriber base grows (via Incarna and microtransactions), it would be possible to hire more people to work on EVE.


It took you nearly two months to get this garbage out in the open?

Hey guys, we've sapped all the worthwhile resources out of our golden goose called eve, if you buy some more junk from our cashgrab shop maybe we'll get back to actually working on it again instead of just making new skirts and shoes. Oh yeah DUST WOD :AWESOME: hurf durf.

Mors Sanctitatis
Posted - 2011.07.13 05:09:00 - [103]
 

Originally by: XIRUSPHERE
Edited by: XIRUSPHERE on 12/07/2011 18:03:51
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Kerrisone
Quote:

The CSM repeated the concern, raised at previous summits, that too many resources were devoted to
"new and shiny". The question of whether, after the initial development of Incarna and Establishments,
some of those resources could be redirected towards fixing existing features was raised.

CCP replied that a significant portion of the resources used to develop Incarna have been borrowed
from other projects, or are being used to develop infrastructure that has broader application than just
Incarna.



CSM pointed out that iterating on an existing feature and at the same time adding some new functionality and art will provide the new "shiny" that Marketing & Sales can use to promote an expansion.

CCP observed that doing the Dead Horse revamp would require 2 tech teams plus an art team for one or two releases. It was also pointed out that if the subscriber base grows (via Incarna and microtransactions), it would be possible to hire more people to work on EVE.


Again there is money for WOD/DUST but not for EVE, thanks again CCP.

Oh and I thought you guys said that MT from NEX was to pay for the development of NEX items cause fashion designers that make stuff I could draw up when I was 9 years old cost so much.

http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=913



It's actually the other way around. We've been heavily borrowing resources from projects like WoD for EVE.


So you guys plan on using the same attitude with your new babies too I take it? If it looks good it is good, dysfunctional abandon-ware from the onset to be supplemented by broken content and a service ethos that supports hacks and shills. Helicity was apt saying these new creations will be stillborn.

Seriously though, please don't claim that resources for WOD were given to EVE when those resources are ultimately for WOD. You injected a WOD alpha into our universe, broke it's immersion, introduced the first and only indestructible items in the game which spit in the face of the mechanics and wondered why someone threw a match on all the furniture you keep spilling gas on.

This playerbase does not respond to BS like EA crowds do, figure it out.


Xirusphere communicates my sentiments exactly.

Lauren Ambraelle
Posted - 2011.07.13 05:46:00 - [104]
 

Originally by: Written Word
A company that brags non stop on how big it is getting, complains constantly about the lack of resources?

Question

Originally by: CCP Soundwave


It's actually the other way around. We've been heavily borrowing resources from projects like WoD for EVE.


You like when people call bull**** on you.

That is bull****. Pure and simple.



I think what they meant was, all of the resources they pulled off Eve to put on WoD had to be put back on Eve. Rolling Eyes

Dariel Ash
Caldari
Foetus Mart
Posted - 2011.07.13 06:48:00 - [105]
 

Well, I thought this was pretty awesome.

Casod Sutherland
Posted - 2011.07.13 07:01:00 - [106]
 

Originally by: EVE Security Task Force
In addition, more resources will be devoted to protecting the client. As part of this, ESTF is considering disallowing the use of virtual machines with the EVE client

ShockedughMad
CCP, if you disallow Eve on Wine/Linux, I am unsubbing. I enjoy Eve, but not enough to install Windows on my computer and then have to reboot just to play internet spaceships.

Callidus Dux
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.13 08:45:00 - [107]
 

And what ist about the old hangar view? You promised to bring a hangar, similar to the old one. I did not see, that you are working on it? Another fake from CCP?

WHEN WILL YOU BRING BACK THE OLD HANGAR VIEW????


Makko Gray
Pheno-Tech Industries
Crimson Wings.
Posted - 2011.07.13 08:46:00 - [108]
 

Edited by: Makko Gray on 13/07/2011 08:52:11
Originally by: Dolm De'Mourne
Originally by: The Mittani

Screw your class 1-4 ABC.



Considering even those daytrippers are subject to all the dangers of null without local, why shouldn't they have access to ABC ores?


I agree that WHs have a significant risk associated with them that merits ABC ores - though was there not some talk of creating 2 tiers of wormhole one for habitation and one for day trippers? If so would be nice to see these looked at together.

Outside of that I think removing them all together would not be good, but balancing the quantities and frequency against the WH class seems more reasonable particularly as I thought that it always used to be the case that you could scan out ABC sites in low sec.

Makko Gray
Pheno-Tech Industries
Crimson Wings.
Posted - 2011.07.13 08:49:00 - [109]
 

Originally by: Callidus Dux
And what ist about the old hangar view? You promised to bring a hangar, similar to the old one. I did not see, that you are working on it? Another fake from CCP?

WHEN WILL YOU BRING BACK THE OLD HANGAR VIEW????




These are the _MAY_ CSM notes - I think there is a lot you didn't see.

SwissChris1
Playboy Delivery Service
S E D I T I O N
Posted - 2011.07.13 08:55:00 - [110]
 

Edited by: SwissChris1 on 13/07/2011 08:59:12
Edited by: SwissChris1 on 13/07/2011 08:58:58
After a quick first read....

-Dreads not getting enough love but thanks for looking into Supercaps

-"...local as we know it is going to change in a Winter expansion"

?????


-"high-level alliance assets in the form of death stars" +1 this is hot!

Reika Sakari
Posted - 2011.07.13 09:24:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: Casod Sutherland
Originally by: EVE Security Task Force
In addition, more resources will be devoted to protecting the client. As part of this, ESTF is considering disallowing the use of virtual machines with the EVE client

ShockedughMad
CCP, if you disallow Eve on Wine/Linux, I am unsubbing. I enjoy Eve, but not enough to install Windows on my computer and then have to reboot just to play internet spaceships.


I agree with this entirely! But I see this further down:

Originally by: EVE Security Task Force
In addition, more resources will be devoted to protecting the client. As part of this, ESTF is considering
disallowing the use of virtual machines with the EVE client as metrics indicate there are very few players
using virtual machines for legitimate purposes.
CSM raised the edge case of Mac users using Parallels as opposed to the Mac client; CCP agreed that
there should be a way for players who have a need to do things like this to have a way to authenticate
themselves with CCP.



Technically, wine isn't a virtual machine (or an emulator), it's a compatibility layer, but what I understand from the minutes is that they intend to stop Eve from running on non-native platforms.

Can we get some confirmation that this will in fact affect Linux users running Eve under wine? And, If so, will there be a way to "authenticate ourselves with CCP" so that those of us who don't run a supported OS can keep playing?

Out of curiosity, what does running Eve in wine show up as in CCP statistics?

DeBingJos
Minmatar
Goat Holdings
Posted - 2011.07.13 09:37:00 - [112]
 

I'm very worried about the super-API stuff that will allow you to sell/buy stuff on the market.

First of all, this will allow a whole new range of bots to manipulate the game.

Second (and maybe most important), do we thrust CCP's web development team with this? They cannot even implement the new forums! Do we want these guys to have influence on our gameplay?

My 0.02isk.

SwissChris1
Playboy Delivery Service
S E D I T I O N
Posted - 2011.07.13 09:40:00 - [113]
 

Edited by: SwissChris1 on 13/07/2011 09:58:54
Edited by: SwissChris1 on 13/07/2011 09:56:06
Originally by: DeBingJos

....

Second (and maybe most important), do we thrust CCP's web development team with this? They cannot even implement the new forums! Do we want these guys to have influence on our gameplay?

My 0.02isk.


QFT!! (Yes, I am a web developer)

Quote:
In response to a question about how incremental virtual goods store income might be used to benefit EVE, Zulu replied that he is currently arguing for the addition of a full feature team, and that extra virtual goods income will give CCP more options; some of it will go to EVE, but other projects will benefit as well.


You first told us AUR was to pay for new content in EVE...just saying (Devblog)
Quote:
The problem with customizability, however, is the amount of time and resources needed to produce unique items and variations. Bear in mind that our HQ is a renovated fish processing plant, not the Wonka factory, and we're fresh out of Oompa Loompas to build these incredible things. So we're left with the question of how to give you the customizability and uniqueness you want without simply raising the subscription rate.

Makko Gray
Pheno-Tech Industries
Crimson Wings.
Posted - 2011.07.13 09:59:00 - [114]
 

Edited by: Makko Gray on 13/07/2011 10:18:24
Originally by: DeBingJos
I'm very worried about the super-API stuff that will allow you to sell/buy stuff on the market.

First of all, this will allow a whole new range of bots to manipulate the game.

Second (and maybe most important), do we thrust CCP's web development team with this? They cannot even implement the new forums! Do we want these guys to have influence on our gameplay?

My 0.02isk.


I wouldn't think the core of the USL would be written by the web team - they might then consume it in order to expose it over HTTP as part of the API. I'm sure (I hope) everyone at CCP has security more in mind after the forums issues though.

Have to agree which the concerns about having market manipulation done via the API though as it would be very easy to write an EVEmon style app that automated the whole purchasing and selling.

Things that might be nice are:
Remote skill queue management.
Ability to jump clone (might be nice so you can control the 24 hour cool down when not able to log on).
Ability to remap if you've one available.

Might be okay to list sell orders or contracts from items in your hanger remotely but buying and selling allows the whole process to be automated and remote buying is much more of a concern.

Sturmwolke
Posted - 2011.07.13 10:18:00 - [115]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
It's actually the other way around. We've been heavily borrowing resources from projects like WoD for EVE.


Another gaffe?

As per CCP hf Consolidated Financial Statement 2010, EVE is pulling in revenue around 50-60mil USD yearly.
Now, fair enough as a company, you get to spend it as you see fit.

However, as evident, it's very hard to justify the above amount of revenue vs what's CCP have to show for the past year or two.
Specifically with respect to the "spaceships" CORE part of EVE.

The fire's still smoldering. It's not out ... by a long shot.

SwissChris1
Playboy Delivery Service
S E D I T I O N
Posted - 2011.07.13 10:21:00 - [116]
 

Edited by: SwissChris1 on 13/07/2011 10:25:33
Quote:
The CSM inquired about the ‘V3’ process, which is required to upgrade each ship to the new graphics system. It would take an entire release to do all of the ships; each individual ship takes 2-3 weeks of work to bring up to V3. The conversion process allows CCP to improve the aesthetics. It will take years to update each ship not merely to V3, but to modern aesthetic standards, like those on the new Scorpion and Maller.


Crying or Very sad

This just confused the hell out of me...maybe try and allocate more resources? lol are you kidding me???
Quote:
The Scorpion and Maller were side projects of one Art dev. He recently did a new Raven, but the model didn’t pass muster. The CSM asked what Art would like to do next ship-wise; the Raven is a top candidate.

But hurray for a new Raven!

DeBingJos
Minmatar
Goat Holdings
Posted - 2011.07.13 10:30:00 - [117]
 

Edited by: DeBingJos on 13/07/2011 10:30:29
Originally by: SwissChris1
Edited by: SwissChris1 on 13/07/2011 10:25:33
Quote:
The CSM inquired about the ‘V3’ process, which is required to upgrade each ship to the new graphics system. It would take an entire release to do all of the ships; each individual ship takes 2-3 weeks of work to bring up to V3. The conversion process allows CCP to improve the aesthetics. It will take years to update each ship not merely to V3, but to modern aesthetic standards, like those on the new Scorpion and Maller.


Crying or Very sad

This just confused the hell out of me...maybe try and allocate more resources? lol are you kidding me???
Quote:
The Scorpion and Maller were side projects of one Art dev. He recently did a new Raven, but the model didn’t pass muster. The CSM asked what Art would like to do next ship-wise; the Raven is a top candidate.

But hurray for a new Raven!


QFT, this should be top priority. They should do 100% of the ships spread over the next 2 expansions.

ART is probably a bottleneck because they do 95% DUST/WOD and 5% EVE related stuff.

Josef Huffenpuff
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.13 11:28:00 - [118]
 

Quote:
CCP then introduced the Unified Service Layer (USL), a new construct building upon the API to allow a web-interface with Eve; effectively the API on steroids. The USL would be capable of allowing end users to buy items from the Eve market without logging in, and a variety of other similar things. If all goes well, CCP hopes to be able deploy the USL soon. This fed into a very brief discussion on third party monetization.


While the USL in principle sounds like an excellent thing, please kill the highlighted part before it is born. Anyone with a couple of brain cells knows that buying anything off the market (except maybe overpriced Monocles for Aurum) - or, mother of all demons, actually selling something - without logging in would lay waste to the market by un-detectable botting.

Or is this another typical example of why CCP need professional help communicating with their customers ??

Florestan Bronstein
24th Imperial Crusade
Posted - 2011.07.13 11:54:00 - [119]
 

Originally by: Josef Huffenpuff
Quote:
CCP then introduced the Unified Service Layer (USL), a new construct building upon the API to allow a web-interface with Eve; effectively the API on steroids. The USL would be capable of allowing end users to buy items from the Eve market without logging in, and a variety of other similar things. If all goes well, CCP hopes to be able deploy the USL soon. This fed into a very brief discussion on third party monetization.


While the USL in principle sounds like an excellent thing, please kill the highlighted part before it is born. Anyone with a couple of brain cells knows that buying anything off the market (except maybe overpriced Monocles for Aurum) - or, mother of all demons, actually selling something - without logging in would lay waste to the market by un-detectable botting.

Or is this another typical example of why CCP need professional help communicating with their customers ??


The USL would be a great opportunity for introducing microsubscriptions on top of the current fee.

Make one-way (read-only) access free and charge 2-3€/month (or the equivalent in AUR) for 2-way access.

Other than changing skills and market access there are not a whole lot of useful services that could be exposed through the API. Maybe some S&I features...


Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2011.07.13 11:55:00 - [120]
 

The complete lack of serious warnings to CCP from the CSM about the upcoming Incarna desaster is mindboggling. It shows that they failed pretty hard on this.

And then, afterwards they were yelling heavily at CCP?!

Everyone can make mistakes, CCP as well as the CSM. But at least CCP acknowledged that they made a mistake. The CSM however walzed on, bathing in the spotlight of big attention. Instead they should have really have dropped in shame, because this mess was also their fault as the minutes now reveal.

So CSM, what will you do to prevent another such failure?


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

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