open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Rig Balancing - Your Opinions and Suggestions!
 
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

Leaping Tiger
Posted - 2009.07.08 03:59:00 - [91]
 

It's all about the skill brother. Each skill has five levels. Please make them DO something. Skills need to apply to the effectiveness of rigs, not just to the drawbacks and not to just being able to equip something. Give me a reason to want to train all of my skills to level V, PLEASE.

Frankly I don't think there should be any attributes modified by rigs that can be had by standard modules. Otherwise there's little differenc except cost. That is uninteresting. Please be creative. There needs to be an anti-energy drain rig. How about a tractor beam range boost. You can do it on marauders, but it's otherwise impossible? As a matter of fact I think all of the role bonus stuff should be put into rigs. The Bhalgorn gets a 10% boost to NOS per level. Give us some of that. Be creative.

You guys have done a really great job of making the skills relevant - Jesus this is irritating trying to type with the box going crazy - of making the skills relevant to the ships. Maybe we can do the same for the rigs. Eve is all about the skills. And the Benjamins.

And we need some legit drone rigs too.

something somethingdark
Posted - 2009.07.08 04:23:00 - [92]
 

allot of what digital communist sayd realy ...

the original rig implementation was perhaps a big of a mistake as adding caps (save for the carrier) to the game

basicaly rigs turned out to be a fix for certain ships that whernt realy viable for certain or most things before and turned perhaps a bit overly fast ships into hilariously overpowered fast ships
and for anything bigger than a cruiser or anything t2 they are infact another required slot you have to fill unless you are going for disposable

so the biggest problem is rigs = modules
rigs should be rigs something you attach to the ship to give it a twistm to make it do something special or unexpected
they shouldnt be something along the lines of

"o hey the original designer of this ship didnt give it enough capacitor to actualy run the guns but no problem luckily he left some modular compartments for me to jamm in 3 aditional caprechargers to make that damn ship actualy work"
and neither should they be something along the lines of
"hey my powergrid is low wel ill just bolt 3 more reactors to my original reactor" or "why dont i roll my ship in 3 more layers of armor nobody ever thought about making that standard"

rigs should be something you cobble together and weld in place
in my mind it should be something along the lines of "i found a bunch of minmatar turret controls tinkered with it and now i can fit autocannons on my mega and recieve its bonuses"

not saying that would completly **** with the current way of balancing weapons by balancing ship bonuses but it would bring uniqueness and suprise to the whole ordeal

could be something like i rigged my ship... sacrificed a lowslot and some powergrid but now i have another medslot!

not that this will ever happen .... ever
but take a giant step back from the whole rigs just another module type
arriving at that point half the ships will now be useless or not flyable at all fix those(hello passive shieldtanks) and the weapon systems away from at least damage bonuses on ships thing and then make rigs something unique you do to your ship...

i just rigged my drake with the launchers in place and my launchers now hold 80 missiles!!!! i just cant unfit those launchers anymore .....


or alternativly .... just make a button on the left to launch excel and save everybody the hassle lol Rolling Eyes

Morikai Acler
Caldari
The Whitesands Consortium
Honourable Templum of Alcedonia
Posted - 2009.07.08 06:07:00 - [93]
 

I have some thoughts here and some questions...

1.) Are the new rig classes going to be interchangeable between ship classes? If so or if not, how are they going to be penalized or buffed to encourage fitting large rigs on larger ship classes?

2.) Stacking..... Either all rigs need to have a stacking penalty, or they need to have no stacking penalty. I'm starting to think in the case of say the resistance rigs for shield and armor, either the rig buffs don't apply to the ships resist module stack, and stay at around the same bonus level. They continue to be stacking penalized as is, but are buffed to put them more in line with the module counterparts. Or Instead of working the way all resist mods to, essentially adding X% of the difference between the base and 100% resist, and less with stacking.... The resist bonus could be lowered, but, be added directly to the base resistance of the ship, with no stacking penalty to other resist modules.. Obviously in that case the rigs themselves would have their own stack penalty or not be able to use more than one of that type. Though that could present obvious problems especially on HAC style ships.

The stacking thing also applies to weapon rigs, they really need to have a separate stack from regular low slot mods, with a slight buff to make them more desirable. Especially the missile velocity rigs to maybe make missiles more useful for fleet.

3) There are a lot of areas where I can see there should be rigs but aren't any, and I'm sure there are gonna be plenty of people to suggest them.

Cobalt Sixty
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2009.07.08 07:14:00 - [94]
 

A few thoughts ...
Originally by: Zeerover
Change the Liquid Cooled Electronics rig to work in the same way as the Ancillary Current Router - e.g. it gives +10% / +15% CPU.
Which would make it almost exactly the same as the Co-Processor module - boring! Though maybe I'm biased because I've actually found an (albeit niche) use for this particular (and particularly cheap) Rig on some of my fittings.

I would like to see a Remote ECCM/ECCM Rig appear, but that stems from my wanting to see either the Scimitar or Oneiros drop the Tracking Link bonus for ECCM - though now that people have (mostly) stop screaming "BECAUSE OF FALCON!" it doesn't make it quite as attractive as it once was.

In general, Electronics Rigs could use some attention, especially the co-called "Mini Profession" kind.

Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer Rigs: I really like these and while I view them as being another niche Rig, they're still (in my opinion) useful in their own way. I don't want them changed, but it would be interesting to see them expanded upon by way of a Rig (or bonus) which increases the acceleration to maximum warp speed - but I have no idea how easily (or not) it could be implemented.

The only time you'll ever fit a Stasis Drone Augmentor is if you're packing a set of the Beserker SW-900 drones - a little too specific in my opinion. I'd rather that this rig be dropped in favor of a slightly buffed Drone Speed Augmentor Rig instead.

Sera Ryskin
Posted - 2009.07.08 07:54:00 - [95]
 

Originally by: Cobalt Sixty
Though maybe I'm biased because I've actually found an (albeit niche) use for this particular (and particularly cheap) Rig on some of my fittings.


Please, tell me just what this setup is, keeping in mind the option to fit an ACR rig and a zero-CPU mod a low slot, giving you an even bigger CPU reduction than the LCE rig.


PS: a CPU version of the ACR rig would work even better in that situation, no matter what it is, so you really have no reason to want it to keep its current bonus.

Tiger's Spirit
Caldari
Posted - 2009.07.08 08:04:00 - [96]
 

Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 08/07/2009 08:09:12
What kind of rig is missing from the game and which one need changes:

1. I dnot know why, but CPU rig missing from the game.
Need that, like Semiconductor Memory Cell (cap) or Ancillary current router (PG)

2. Needs more drones rig like combat drones damage rigs, ranges and logistic,combat utility, EW drones rigs too.

3. Missing ECCM rigs.

4.
Defensive rigs need stacking penalty, like combat,speed, and resist too or all rigs not need penalty.

5. Revision of polycarbon rigs. Nothing using them, because useless now. Delete or revision.

6. Active tank need little boost and shield resist too (armor resists starts with 20% benefit)

This is not rig problem but armor plates and shield extenders need stacking penalty like speed modules and damage mods.

Cobalt Sixty
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2009.07.08 08:40:00 - [97]
 

Edited by: Cobalt Sixty on 08/07/2009 08:55:42
Originally by: Sera Ryskin
Originally by: Cobalt Sixty
Though maybe I'm biased because I've actually found an (albeit niche) use for this particular (and particularly cheap) Rig on some of my fittings.
Please, tell me just what this setup is, keeping in mind the option to fit an ACR rig and a zero-CPU mod a low slot, giving you an even bigger CPU reduction than the LCE rig.

PS: a CPU version of the ACR rig would work even better in that situation, no matter what it is, so you really have no reason to want it to keep its current bonus.
I can't quote the exact fitting verbatim because I'm nowhere near that ship at this time, but it involves a Keres. Niche, as I said.

Let me be clear: I'm not opposed to an CPU enhancing (ACR style) Rig, I just don't want it to replace the LCE Rig. I would assume such a Rig would have higher build requirements than the LCE, making the LCE a cheaper alternative for a role more specialised than general CPU hunger.

EDIT ONE: Another thought, is that the various flavors of Rig skill should negate the negative affect applied by 20% per level instead of 10%, rewarding those pilots who've trained to the maximum with the ability to wholly compensate for the negative impact of a rig - not that I expect this will happen by any stretch, I'm just indulging in a flight of fancy now.

EDIT TWO: Actually, while I'm on the subject of flights of fancy I'd like to see the LCE buffed to 15% at Tech I instead of 10% as I now recall that I was still an annoying < 1 CPU off of my originally planned fitting and have since had to compromise on it anyway.

Darth Felin
Posted - 2009.07.08 09:07:00 - [98]
 

Sized rigs are great idea but there are some problems with rigs.

1) Rigs drawbacks.

Much of them are really weird. Armor and Shield rigs penalty is good and logical. But why electronics superiority rigs decreases you shield??? For some ships (shield tankers) it is huge penalty but for another ones (armor tankers) it is disposable. Reverse situation is for astronautic rigs. It penalize armor tankers but does not concern shield tankers at all.
It is just crazy.

2) Rig effects

Trimark armor pumps and Core Defence Fields Extender should be stacked penalized as are all other defense rigs.

3) Missing rigs

Some rigs are missing. It is CPU rig, Drone damage rig and so one.

Tagami Wasp
Caldari
Sarz'na Khumatari
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2009.07.08 09:36:00 - [99]
 

DO NOT NERF ALREADY EXISTING RIGS!
DO NOT GIVE STACKING PENALTIES TO EXISTING RIGS!

Now this is out of my system, here are my opinions in a moderate and civilized way.
Please add:
Drone rigs
1) dronebay expanders as rigs (NOT as a percentage)taking space away from cargo hold
2) bandwidth extension rigs(NOT as a percentage), maybe increasing lock time.
3) all sizes drone's damage rigs
4) all sizes drone's speed rigs
Shield rigs
1) Increase T1 shield resist rigs to 35%, T2 to 45%
2) Increase the skill related bonus vs drawback. If I train the shield rig skills to 5 I want no sig increase
Weapon rigs
1) Unstack them all, give block bonuses, they are rigs, not modules, they should behave like the tank rigs.
2) Revisit weapon systems. Having a CPU reduction rig for hybrids and not being able to fit T2 250's on an Eagle sucks, why not have something in that direction for PG?

Future Mutant
Republic Military School
Posted - 2009.07.08 10:14:00 - [100]
 

If you implement a way to convert broken salvage into t2 salvage then please for the love of god dont make it as bad as alchemy...
Does anyone ever use alchemy?
T2 rigs need some loving- the price needs to drop at least in half for them to be commonly used.

Muul Udonii
Minmatar
THORN Syndicate
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2009.07.08 11:10:00 - [101]
 

I've fitted rigs to some of my frigs. Does this mean that i've actually wasted my money, as now there will be a rig for the frigs that will be around 1/3 of the price?

I'm a little annoyed about that, as I wouldn't have fit any if I had known what the changes were going to be.

44000
Posted - 2009.07.08 11:37:00 - [102]
 

Rather than trying to introduce a new mechanic, why not alow salvaging of T2 salvage from T2 rats, not all the time, but the occasional drop.

or els a posiblity of salvaging T2 salvage from rigged T1 ships 'thats considering that a rig is kind of repared salvage'

that would bring more T2 salvage onto the market, but alow it to be controled and stop it becoming worthless.

as for a previous comment, I cant remember who by, salvaging HAS kinda taken over mining as an apparent 'mini-profesion'. thats not right? make the skills needed for salvaging higher, and/or reduce the amont of salvage dropped by ships (crazy as this might seem). Now that there are going to be multiple sizes of rigs, there is not nesisarily a need for so much. small and (especialy) medium rigs are gonna explode! Now that there is not so much of a need to harvest masses of salvage to make one rig, reducing the amoount out there might be wise to reduce the 'over salvaging' and once again, bring it back to a mini-proffesion that is profitable for those who invest into it.

please excuse the spelling and grammar mistakes, i'm typing quickly at work.

44000
Posted - 2009.07.08 11:38:00 - [103]
 

Originally by: Muul Udonii
I've fitted rigs to some of my frigs. Does this mean that i've actually wasted my money, as now there will be a rig for the frigs that will be around 1/3 of the price?

I'm a little annoyed about that, as I wouldn't have fit any if I had known what the changes were going to be.


we all kind of have, but it lets us have fun for a month till the update, so it doesnt matter that much. thats just eve Wink

Elle Anor
Posted - 2009.07.08 11:56:00 - [104]
 

Edited by: Elle Anor on 08/07/2009 11:57:17
I agree with many of the points raised by others and there are some good ideas (though I disagree with a good few too).

My thoughts on what has been written by CCP and others:
1) Please - no conversion of T1 -> T2 salvage. T2 rigs are an expense, yes but not completely out of reach or too overpriced
2) I agree with the posts asking for only allowing one rig of each type per ship. This could bring greater variety to ships as more options would become viable with this restriction. This could also allow rigs to be placed outside stack penalties as there could be only one rig affecting that attribute
3) If not only one type of rig then perhaps stack amplifying the drawbacks is an option where they are not stack penalised (i.e. armour rigs etc) so the draw back becomes greater for each extra same rig that goes on your ship
4) I don't think there should be rigs that have no drawbacks, the "increased heat damage" for powergrid rigs was an idea I'd had myself and thought was a good one. It wouldn't heavily affect the 3CCC PVE missioning Raven though.

As for extra rigs "missing" from the game, some more drone rigs would be nice though any that increase in bandwidth would have to be very carefully judged. As someone with nearly 6mil SP in drone skills I would welcome, e.g. an extra 10mb per rig but this would bring the med drone toting Ishkur back into the game (though could also be a boost to the Myrmidon).

Something that could be a welcome addition (an idea from a non-cap ship pilot!) are rigs that reduce cap/fuel required (or cap penalty) for jump drive/bridge initiation for cap ships (and black ops).

ECCM rig would also be a great addition, bring variety and a touch of the unknown to engaging a ship.

There are obviously many other rigs that require balancing with the changes in the game that have occurred since they were introduced.

Just my 2 cents

Edited for rubbish formatting

Sera Ryskin
Posted - 2009.07.08 11:59:00 - [105]
 

Originally by: Cobalt Sixty
Let me be clear: I'm not opposed to an CPU enhancing (ACR style) Rig, I just don't want it to replace the LCE Rig. I would assume such a Rig would have higher build requirements than the LCE, making the LCE a cheaper alternative for a role more specialised than general CPU hunger.


You realize that even with an increase in build requirements, the reduction in build requirements for it being a small size rig would probably mean it takes less to build than an existing LCE rig, right?

Cobalt Sixty
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2009.07.08 13:01:00 - [106]
 

Edited by: Cobalt Sixty on 08/07/2009 13:02:42
Originally by: Sera Ryskin
Originally by: Cobalt Sixty
Let me be clear: I'm not opposed to an CPU enhancing (ACR style) Rig, I just don't want it to replace the LCE Rig. I would assume such a Rig would have higher build requirements than the LCE, making the LCE a cheaper alternative for a role more specialised than general CPU hunger.

You realize that even with an increase in build requirements, the reduction in build requirements for it being a small size rig would probably mean it takes less to build than an existing LCE rig, right?

Well obviously. I am aware of the future and not just what I have fitted now.

Remember that if we have Frigate sized CPU enhancing (ACR style) Rigs then we'll have Frigate sized LCE Rigs too, so presumably if the (now Frigate sized) LCE Rig has lower build requirements than the CPU enhancing (ACR style and also now Frigate sized) Rig it will be cheaper to buy and fit the LCE than the CPU enhancing (ACR style) Rig.

Which means I can get a Rig that will boost my available CPU by reducing the CPU needs of the particular modules I've fitted, without paying any more than I have to in order to get what I want - which I would likely otherwise be doing with just a flat CPU enhancement.

Again, I'm not opposed to a CPU enhancing (ACR style) Rig, I just don't see the need to remove the Liquid Cooled Electronics Rig to introduce it.

McDaddy Pimp
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.07.08 13:06:00 - [107]
 

Balance
1. Shield Resist rigs are to cheap
2. Put a panalty on rigs that doesnt have them like CCC
3. Warp speed rigs need more war speed bonus
4. Polycarbon rig was over-nerfed
5. Stacking penalty on rigs that didn't have them, Trimarks, CCC, shield purgers/extenders etc.

New rig ideas
1. ECCM rigs
2. Drone bay capacity rigs (drone bandwidth rigs however is OP)
3. Clip size/reload time rigs
4. Heat damage abosorbtion rigs
5. Sig radius reduction rigs
6. CPU increase rigs
7. Web strength and target painter rigs (both are Minnie EW, which proves again the the devs hates Minmatar)

M Blanc
Posted - 2009.07.08 15:50:00 - [108]
 

Edited by: M Blanc on 08/07/2009 16:07:40
The approach CCP have taken to rigs seems a bit schizophrenic. Is rigging intended to be a zero-sum game - a rig confers bonus X and penalty Y, such that the rigged ship is more specialized than its unrigged counterpart, but less generally effective? Or is the intent to make rigging mandatory such that only a fool (or someone who's broke...) would undock in an unrigged ship? Things like CDFEs, Trimarks, CCCs and so on would tend to suggest the latter - they make ships considerably more effective, with penalties that are either non-existent or are relatively inconsequential. A lot of other rigs have penalties that are as severe as their benefits are advantageous, and would seem to suggest that rigging is intended to be a zero-sum game; slight benefit in return for slight drawback.

I think that the zero-sum route is preferable; rigs shouldn't be mandatory, nor should a rigged ship automatically be better than an unrigged one. If you're going to go down that road, rigs whose benefits vastly outweigh their drawbacks need to be nerfed - in particular, stacking penalties need to be applied to CDFEs and Trimarks. If you want to make rigs mandatory, however, you need to make *every* rig as good as those two. Fitting 3x DPS rigs should boost your DPS output by ~50%; 3x speed rigs should make you 50% faster, etc. The prices you're planning for medium and small rigs mean that anyone who's been playing for any length of time will be able to rig any frigate/cruiser/bc they choose with whichever rigs they like, so price differences between rigs won't mean a thing - if you want to rig, say, a Harbinger and can get three medium-sized trimarks for ~15m, you're always going to go for those rather than some cheaper set because 15m is a completely inconsequential sum, both in absolute terms and relative to the up-front cost of the hull.

Havok Pierce
Gallente
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2009.07.08 16:03:00 - [109]
 

Originally by: Cebraio
Edited by: Cebraio on 07/07/2009 08:50:54
Pardon my whining, but this ....
(stuff)
Why should I not worry to loose e.g. 14 million per rig on my frigs in comparison to someone who puts them on after the change?

I would rather like to have the small and medium rigs removed and have them put into my hanger as large ones, so I can at least sell them.


Ah, I see what you want -- you'd like the use of the rigs and to profit off of them. I suspect that's never going to happen. The current rigs in small ships are a sunk cost. No use worrying about it.

I'm concerned myself about how the market will effect some of the corner-case rigs (gravity capacitor upgrades). My prediction is that post-patch, the primary market will be in smalls, with medium and large sizes being nearly impossible to find.

The DRUDGE
Posted - 2009.07.08 16:53:00 - [110]
 

In terms of balancing rigs, I agree that there needs to be buffing of the current rigs (offensive) and more rigs added (drone rigs and cpu rigs, etc). In terms of nerfing current rigs, I think that would be a unwise decision on CCP's part. If CCC (and others) rigs were nerfed (stacking penalty applied), that would essentially break a lot of player's current loadouts (no more permarunning,etc,etc). If this happened, CCP would have to buff something else in order somewhat counteract a nerf. For the trimarks ( I dont use them, but know how they work), I think it'd be kinda dumb to nerf it. Think about it, when you add more armor, why add a stacking penalty? It's like adding more ram to your PC and getting a stacking penalty because of it? In the end, my take on this whole thing is to just buff current weak rigs and add some more.

Cobalt Sixty
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2009.07.08 17:21:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: M Blanc
stuff

Rigs are about as mandatory as Modules: you can choose to fit them, or you can leave the slots empty. It is your decision to make, at your own cost.

5pinDizzy
Amarr
Pillow Fighters Inc
Posted - 2009.07.08 18:56:00 - [112]
 

Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 08/07/2009 18:56:55

Originally by: Ephemeron
I think the speed rigs were nerfed too hard, but I won't rant on that


Agreed. It's not that they don't offer enough bonus I think, it's just that they are too gimped by the stacking penalty, there's pretty much no point fitting speed mods in your rigs if you've got a couple in your low slots.

I'd concentrate on boosting auxillary thrusters in giving more speed and make polycarbons give less speed but more agility.

Electronic superiority rigs are pretty gimped too, like the ones for dampeners and tracking destruptors, but then pretty much all ewar is very gimped atm.


Astarry
Posted - 2009.07.08 19:15:00 - [113]
 

I love the idea of different sized rigs with more reasonable costs.
Rig fitting requirements Have to be looked at. You have 400 points for this on most ships. for exploration The Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II can't be practically fit it costs 300 points and gives a 15% bonus to probe strength. I have to fit 2 level one rigs which each have a 10% bonus to get 20%. If your gonna balance rigs you have to look at fitting requiements not all T2 rigs have that stiff a fitting req. So why does it in this case? All ships should be able to fit 2 T2 rigs of any kind.
I love the idea about making the Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer rig increase acceleration as well. These rigs are fun but could also use a bit of a boost IMHO.

turret tracking booster rigs need a significant boost!!
we also also need a CPU boost rig that gives 10 to 20% more cpu without any drawbacks. It's like adding an extra processor there should be no drawbacks.

How about T3 rigs where you can design the rigs and dictate the drawbacks out of a list of possible drawbacks for the item being boosted? and the drawbacks lessen with the skill level of the manufacturer.


Illectroculus Defined
No Bull Ships
Posted - 2009.07.08 20:21:00 - [114]
 

I can't believe nobody's mentioned the biggest problem with rigs:

Rookie ships can't fit rigs because they have no calibration - can we fix that plz?

wert668
Posted - 2009.07.08 21:54:00 - [115]
 

Give Upgrade Hardpoints to Freighters Exclamation

Rastigan
Caldari
Ars ex Discordia
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2009.07.08 22:03:00 - [116]
 

It seems like alot of the people complaining about tanking rigs are crying for nano rigs to come back.




Jazric
Posted - 2009.07.08 22:46:00 - [117]
 

I agree with some posters on worries that this will make salvage prices go up. I think to some extent this is a good thing as a lot of salvage gets left behind atm. I do think a way to counter balance this would be allowing a certain amount of salvage to be recovered when a rig is removed. This should never be 100%, and could possibly be skill based. Of course this idea might just increase the demand for rigs and drive the price even higher.

Waiting with anticipation for the salvage prices to go up and see the effect it has on dodixie ninja salvagers :-)

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.07.08 22:51:00 - [118]
 

Originally by: Yon Krum


On the topic of reacting T2 rig parts: this feature should be only possible in lowsec or 0.0 POS--NOT in highsec POS. Madness!! Just ask the dev teams that did T3 reactions why they chose to limit them to lowsec. Or, the team that did the alchemy reaction!

No. Put it in lowsec and 0.0. If you want the reward, you take the risk.

--Krum


You really think it will make any difference?

Seeing the size of the salvage even if T1->T2 conversions did require a lot of material a single Cov Ops could move it with ease.

So the result would be some more POS in low sec with a guy going there 10 minutes every day. Wow the difference.

Even better I would simply put a POS in a level 1 WH with a scanning alt to be sure that I will always find the location.


Sol ExAstris
Posted - 2009.07.08 23:08:00 - [119]
 

Leaping Tiger has a solid idea that flows well into another complaint that has been mentioned several times now.

Some of the rigs drawbacks are harsh and require the rig skill to be at IV or V to make them even considerable, while others are completely ignorable. This leaves no reason to train many of those skills.

Solution: Make the rigging skill also effect the bonus the rig gives, not just reduce the drawback. Level V of the appropriate rigging skill should yield the bonuses the rigs currently give (or should give post balancing for the underpowered rigs).


I would also like to reitterate the awesomeness of the idea of having weapon rigs only stack against the other rigs and the modules only stack against the other modules.

galphi
Gallente
Furnulum pani nolo
THE SPACE P0LICE
Posted - 2009.07.09 04:04:00 - [120]
 

I believe MalVortex's post a while back covered the problems with rigs, I highly recommend you check it out here if you have not already done so.


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