Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Joe Starbreaker
Octavian Vanguard
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 17:06:00 -
[301]
Do CVA actually play EVE or do they just whine on the forums? I remember when factional warfare came out, the whole forum was overrun with CVA roleplayers arguing that it was unfair, unjust, and unwise of CCP to develop a factional warfare system without designing it specifically to suit CVA's particular needs. The first time they made this argument, based on their vast experience and long-standing contribution to EVE, it was somewhat convincing. Now, hearing it again, I'm starting to think this is just how CVA sees the world. "CVA's been here a long time and it's not right that CCP change things without taking CVA's needs into consideration! CVA is displeased!"
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc. Novus Auctorita
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 18:03:00 -
[302]
Originally by: Adunh Slavy
Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Originally by: Adunh Slavy There does not need to be a tax involved, there does not need to be a treaty.
Being able to say 'Screw you, I'm not paying' is one of the core principles of EVE. Blanket tax would be against that.
Reading comprehension is a good thing. Try it sometime.
Oh, my reading comprehension is quite sufficient. Calling it a camel does not, in fact, make it less of a duck.
|
Yakia TovilToba
Halliburton Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 18:05:00 -
[303]
This all sounds nice and awesome but i think it will totally change Eve into something different. Why should people even do wars after this ? Now the good space (with the good plexes / best ore) is limited. After the changes there is an abundance of everything that one needs, with the right solar system specialisation and upgrades. So why go to war and take that plex-rich region X from alliance Y, when one can have the same by upgrading a prior useless system ? Giving all that stuff to players that they want is nice, but it will destroy the scarcity of resources, there will be no need to make wars over it, i don't think thats a step in the right direction.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 18:26:00 -
[304]
Originally by: Yakia TovilToba This all sounds nice and awesome but i think it will totally change Eve into something different. Why should people even do wars after this ? Now the good space (with the good plexes / best ore) is limited. After the changes there is an abundance of everything that one needs, with the right solar system specialisation and upgrades. So why go to war and take that plex-rich region X from alliance Y, when one can have the same by upgrading a prior useless system ? Giving all that stuff to players that they want is nice, but it will destroy the scarcity of resources, there will be no need to make wars over it, i don't think thats a step in the right direction.
Not all regions are created equal. Not all regions will have the same level of profitability after they are fully upgraded. Not all resources will be found in every region. Not every conflict is about resources, more often it is about ego.
===== If you go to Za'Ha'Dum I will gank you. |
KrakizBad
Imperium Forces
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 18:48:00 -
[305]
Originally by: Yakia TovilToba This all sounds nice and awesome but i think it will totally change Eve into something different. Why should people even do wars after this ? Now the good space (with the good plexes / best ore) is limited. After the changes there is an abundance of everything that one needs, with the right solar system specialisation and upgrades. So why go to war and take that plex-rich region X from alliance Y, when one can have the same by upgrading a prior useless system ? Giving all that stuff to players that they want is nice, but it will destroy the scarcity of resources, there will be no need to make wars over it, i don't think thats a step in the right direction.
Most violent regions (24 hours) Ships / Pods 0.0 Region 1. Syndicate 833 / 422
I can promise you that people arent pew pewing in Syndicate fighting over minerals. Its amazing but some people fight just to FIGHT and have FUN. Not every fight has to be OVER something, sometimes its fun just to blow up crap cause you can. People should try it.
|
Drahcir Nasom
Independent Manufacturers
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 20:44:00 -
[306]
I haven't read all the replies to this blog, so this might have already been mentioned, but has any thought been given to the logistics requirements involved with changing the BP requirements as suggested?
Taking your Enyo example (and I know the numbers are not finalised), but here's a problem as I see it.
My corp builds a large amount of T2 ships/mods/ammo each week, and according to my spreadsheet we use 7400 Crystalline Carbonide Armor Plates each week. With the right PE research and implants, a single component BPO can make about 6550 armor plates a week, so we need about 1.13 weeks of production to keep up with our weekly requirements. On the other hand, we use 4380 Fusion Reactor Units per week and can make 3275 from a single BPO, so we need 1.34 weeks of production to keep up with our weekly requirements. So, between those 2 items, 3 factory slots is easily enough to cover our needs for a week.
In your example, the requirements for Crystalline Carbonide goes up 12.5x and the requirements for Fusion Reactors goes down by a factor of 8. For ease of calculation, lets say the former goes up 10x and the latter down by a factor of 10.
So, under the new system we now need 74000 Armor Plates each week and 438 Reactors. Unless the BPs change to reduce component production time (which isn't mentioned in the blog), we now need 11.3 factory slots for our armor plate production and 0.13 slots for the reactors. So, where 3 factory slots were plenty to make the components, we now need nearer 12 slots.
With factory slots already pretty hard to come by in some places, suddenly quadrupling the number of slots required to make components is going to cause absolute chaos.
Drahcir
|
Katarlia Simov
Minmatar Cowboys From Hell
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 20:57:00 -
[307]
Originally by: Drahcir Nasom I haven't read all the replies to this blog, so this might have already been mentioned, but has any thought been given to the logistics requirements involved with changing the BP requirements as suggested?
Taking your Enyo example (and I know the numbers are not finalised), but here's a problem as I see it.
My corp builds a large amount of T2 ships/mods/ammo each week, and according to my spreadsheet we use 7400 Crystalline Carbonide Armor Plates each week. With the right PE research and implants, a single component BPO can make about 6550 armor plates a week, so we need about 1.13 weeks of production to keep up with our weekly requirements. On the other hand, we use 4380 Fusion Reactor Units per week and can make 3275 from a single BPO, so we need 1.34 weeks of production to keep up with our weekly requirements. So, between those 2 items, 3 factory slots is easily enough to cover our needs for a week.
In your example, the requirements for Crystalline Carbonide goes up 12.5x and the requirements for Fusion Reactors goes down by a factor of 8. For ease of calculation, lets say the former goes up 10x and the latter down by a factor of 10.
So, under the new system we now need 74000 Armor Plates each week and 438 Reactors. Unless the BPs change to reduce component production time (which isn't mentioned in the blog), we now need 11.3 factory slots for our armor plate production and 0.13 slots for the reactors. So, where 3 factory slots were plenty to make the components, we now need nearer 12 slots.
With factory slots already pretty hard to come by in some places, suddenly quadrupling the number of slots required to make components is going to cause absolute chaos.
Drahcir
I imagine that these will be tweaked as well. Don't worry :)
|
KrakizBad
Imperium Forces
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 20:57:00 -
[308]
Originally by: Drahcir Nasom With factory slots already pretty hard to come by in some places, suddenly quadrupling the number of slots required to make components is going to cause absolute chaos.
Lots of factory slots in 0.0 maybe this working as desired ;)
|
Drahcir Nasom
Independent Manufacturers
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 21:03:00 -
[309]
I'll correct myself, I re-read the blog and it does mention that component build times might need tweaking, but it doesn't give any further info, but it's something that will need some serious looking at.
Drahcir
|
Cadde
Gallente FireworX
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 00:41:00 -
[310]
Originally by: Yakia TovilToba This all sounds nice and awesome but i think it will totally change Eve into something different. Why should people even do wars after this ? Now the good space (with the good plexes / best ore) is limited. After the changes there is an abundance of everything that one needs, with the right solar system specialisation and upgrades. So why go to war and take that plex-rich region X from alliance Y, when one can have the same by upgrading a prior useless system ? Giving all that stuff to players that they want is nice, but it will destroy the scarcity of resources, there will be no need to make wars over it, i don't think thats a step in the right direction.
If you are so afraid of eve becoming the carebear game of all times then I'll give you a small but valuable advice...
FIGHT!
Explaination:
If nobody's fighting then this is the perfect time to bring the fight to them, because if you are fighting them. Eventually they will fight back. It is as you said, you don't want the game to become boring and dull. If you start taking space from them they'll start fighting back! If they don't fight back then you simply take their space since it's so profitable and all, then you keep on fighting with the next guy...
Either way...
SOONER OR LATER, THERE WILL BE FIGHTING BACK!
My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
|
|
Adunh Slavy
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 01:46:00 -
[311]
Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Oh, my reading comprehension is quite sufficient. Calling it a camel does not, in fact, make it less of a duck.
And you're a troll.
The Real Space Initiative - V6 (Forum Link)
|
Col Callahan
Caldari The Lazy Boys
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 05:04:00 -
[312]
I think CCP trying (thanks for all the fish), but I think seeing as all the moons are still held in 0.0, its just spreading the wealth over into the other lower end moons, but the money will still be there in the same amounts into the power blocks wallets,
Thus changing nothing........the rich continue to be rich, the poor use macros or bleed out of there eyes from grinding, as usual.
BTW, Are cyno jammers still going to be in the game or are they going to be removed? I want them removed along with system scanners.
I heard you the last time. |
Hrodgar Ortal
Minmatar Ma'adim Logistics
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 05:44:00 -
[313]
Originally by: Drahcir Nasom I haven't read all the replies to this blog, so this might have already been mentioned, but has any thought been given to the logistics requirements involved with changing the BP requirements as suggested?
Taking your Enyo example (and I know the numbers are not finalised), but here's a problem as I see it.
My corp builds a large amount of T2 ships/mods/ammo each week, and according to my spreadsheet we use 7400 Crystalline Carbonide Armor Plates each week. With the right PE research and implants, a single component BPO can make about 6550 armor plates a week, so we need about 1.13 weeks of production to keep up with our weekly requirements. On the other hand, we use 4380 Fusion Reactor Units per week and can make 3275 from a single BPO, so we need 1.34 weeks of production to keep up with our weekly requirements. So, between those 2 items, 3 factory slots is easily enough to cover our needs for a week.
In your example, the requirements for Crystalline Carbonide goes up 12.5x and the requirements for Fusion Reactors goes down by a factor of 8. For ease of calculation, lets say the former goes up 10x and the latter down by a factor of 10.
So, under the new system we now need 74000 Armor Plates each week and 438 Reactors. Unless the BPs change to reduce component production time (which isn't mentioned in the blog), we now need 11.3 factory slots for our armor plate production and 0.13 slots for the reactors. So, where 3 factory slots were plenty to make the components, we now need nearer 12 slots.
With factory slots already pretty hard to come by in some places, suddenly quadrupling the number of slots required to make components is going to cause absolute chaos.
Drahcir
You could always build out of poses.
|
Siobhan
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 08:57:00 -
[314]
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker Do CVA actually play EVE or do they just whine on the forums? I remember when factional warfare came out, the whole forum was overrun with CVA roleplayers arguing that it was unfair, unjust, and unwise of CCP to develop a factional warfare system without designing it specifically to suit CVA's particular needs.
We did not overrun any forum nor did we ask CCP to design it to our needs. We made a number of arguments about how Factional Warfare could have been enhanced - indeed most of our 'concerns' have since proved to be true.
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker I'm starting to think this is just how CVA sees the world. "CVA's been here a long time and it's not right that CCP change things without taking CVA's needs into consideration! CVA is displeased!"
Did you actually read the CVA posts or just decide to have a pop?
Originally by: Siobhan
Before going into too much detail I would like to point out that opinions on 'Dominion' within the CVA are about as diverse as they are on these forums. Why? Because we simply don't know enough about the changes to be sure of anything.
Quote: However it is true that some in CVA see these changes as gamebreaking. I don't necessarily agree with them, nor do many others within the CVA, yet the fact remains that these two individuals are more deeply ingrained in 0.0 industry and production than 99.9% of the EVE playerbase (I have seen their spreadsheets Wink) and as such their opinions should be respected even if you/we don't necessarily agree with the conclusions they are drawing.
Originally by: Siobhan Yes Dominion *MAY* make life more difficult for us - but that is the nature of change. You either adapt or die. As an alliance we have certain core values - our roleplay allegiance to the Amarrian Empire, our desire to create an adjunct of that Empire in 0.0 following Empire rules (NRDS) and our belief in 'truth, justice and the Amarrian way!'
Those values do not have to change - however the way we operate on a daily basis, the way we interact with our neighbours, the way we make our ISK will have to - that is the new challenge for CVA and one I am sure it is more than capabale of meeting.
Originally by: Siobhan Indeed a CCP representative said somewhere that they hoped that the changes in Dominion would make all 0.0 more Providence like - I am just flagging up that in the process of making these changes they may very well be killing their 'model'. Of course until everything is published we wont know - but I am trying to put the reaction of some CVAers into some kind of context...
Originally by: Siobhan As such Providence - which has been held up as a shining example of a prosperous/populated 0.0 region could potentially end up as depopulated as the rest of it - subject to the fine detail being provided.
Originally by: Siobhan As I have said previously CVA will adapt to these changes and try and maintain our core 'values' including NRDS.
Originally by: Siobhan I and the other CVA posters who are flagging this up are not doing so in attempt to preserve the Sov system as it stands (hell we don't like fueling towers anymore than the next man) - but we do want to ensure that CCP is aware of our concerns that the system as proposed (as much as we know of it to date) discriminates against NRDS systems.
Originally by: Siobhan You can classify this as 'whining' if you wish but from my perspective it is the considered viewpoint of highly experienced players who have more firsthand experience in managing a non NBSI 0.0 society than anyone else in the game.
Originally by: Siobhan ...we have yet to see the full detail of the proposals - it is quite possible that the finished article will address some of these concerns - however it would be stupid of us not to voice them in order that they are at least taken into consideration
Are we being so unreasonable or is CVA not allowed to have an opinion? -------------- Avenging Angel -------------- |
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 16:05:00 -
[315]
Quote: BTW, Are cyno jammers still going to be in the game or are they going to be removed? I want them removed along with system scanners.
Cyno jammers only at station systems, system scanner removed loooooonnnnngggggg time ago.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 16:18:00 -
[316]
Many of the opinion posts by CVA members have been quite reasonable.
However even the reasonable posters are recieving a bit of negative backlash from the somewhat arrogant posts a couple of their members started the ball rolling with. Particularly the ones referring to posts which slammed CCP as ignorant for not including a list of demands they presented, of which most of the list was already present and accounted for in the features list for Dominion.
Lets try not to lump all representatives of CVA together when referring to their opinion.
===== If you go to Za'Ha'Dum I will gank you. |
Nick Bison
Gallente Bison Industrial Inc
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 20:54:00 -
[317]
Originally by: Cadde
If you are so afraid of eve becoming the carebear game of all times then I'll give you a small but valuable advice...
FIGHT!
True words, Sir. True words.
|
EFT Worrier
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 00:41:00 -
[318]
With the increased attraction of carebears to 0.0 after the expansion, which means a lot more people to shoot at, I fail to see how this expansion is anything but a massive PVP buff.
In other news, the major alliance tears here are pretty entertaining.
|
Kanatta Jing
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 03:23:00 -
[319]
Well this is a huge change. Everyone on top is going to be in a bit of a panic as how to stay on top and everyone else has to figure out how to profit from the change.
0.0 Industrial Corps won't be jokes anymore. I know they're jokes, I've been in two so far. PVP alliances really do think of them as parasites, regardless of how much ISK you pay or how many ships you build.
Now I'm in a PVP corp with numerous empty systems that always have unused anomalies and are rarely ratted. I can feel 100 million Trit hauler spawns and officer spawns going to waste.
Now for some words of wisdom from someone with 0.0 Carebear experience.
10 Hulks cannot clear out a 0.0 belt in less then an hour, Rorqual bonus's or not. 0.0 belts are made of dense rocks, 1/4 million veldspar to a roid is normal. If you actually clear out a 0.0 constalation of belts before they respawn you should be awarded a free dyspo moon as an upgrade, as you have wielded the largest minning fleet in eve history.
If you can only make 40/mil an hour in 0.0 then you're doing something very, very wrong. The process is this, rat top belt to bottom, twice, then get into your salvager, Like an Exeqorer with two tractors and two salvagers and a shield tank. then loot everything top to bottom. Use the Salvage to build rigs and sell them at inflated 0.0 prices, take the Meta 3 and 4 stuff and ship it to empire to sell at inflated empire prices, refine the rest and sell it to your corp. This works even better if you have a corp mate run the salvager with you.
If your afraid of getting ganked... Why are you in 0.0 again?
|
The Mach
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 05:03:00 -
[320]
"alliances are once more reliant on more traditional income diffuse revenue streams and encouraged to recruit members and form treaties or hold less space."
Won't this encourage blobbing once again? I core idea is fabulous but I fear that success will be entirely based on a NAP fest which is part of the problem currently in null-sec (personal experience from both ends shows)
Could you explain how "superfriend" Alliance/NAP's will be avoided?
|
|
Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 14:30:00 -
[321]
Couldn't all this have been fixed simply by changing the alchemy inputs into R8's or Gasses?
Changing the materials used just seems like another short term fix, like the incredibly pre-nerfed alchemy system that no sane person could have ever assumed was going to increase the supply by any meaningful amount. Supply should become infinite once the cost reaches a particular but already profitable point.
|
Talsha Talamar
Amarr Nebula Rasa Holdings Nebula Rasa
|
Posted - 2009.10.10 15:22:00 -
[322]
Edited by: Talsha Talamar on 10/10/2009 15:25:10 Just a few thoughts after I read up about the dominion changes, written down and developed on the go:
There is a paradigm shift immanent, future wars in 0.0 will not be fought primarily about physical resources, they will be fought about manpower.
Phase 1: Autistic Consolidation Existing alliances will shrink back their territory, to clusters of core worlds they deem strategically valuable due do factors like local resources, defensibility, location, aso. They will then develop these core systems to their maximum capacity.
After this phase they will expand outward again occupying and developing systems on the go. The of limit of this expansion will be set by the capacity of their workforce, since they have to continuously support the owned systems.
Military conflicts will either be limited or severe local brushfires as major alliances try to swallow their former pets and toys.
[i]Phase 2.: Political Expansion[i/] Once the major alliances have reached their individual equilibria they will start to expand again, yet the main instrument for expansion will not be simple war as before but politics and war as tool of politics by other means.
Territorial expansion itself will be worthless without an enlargement of an alliance member base.
The ultimate strategic aim will not be to destroy an opposing alliance but to either directly integrate it, or subjugate the enemy as client state by the means of treaties.
All out war will only be a last option, since the new sov mechanics make the own territory and therefore powerbase, directly vulnerable to enemy incursions. The changes to the quality and quantity of income as well as the loss of secure capital production capabilities, will make it a major risk to dedicate large capital fleets to battle.
Major Wars will be minor skirmishes aimed at destabilizing the enemy, to initiate the famed "fail cascade". Future conflicts will make heavy use of diplomacy, psychological and economical warfare, alt corps, spies, and mercenaries. On many levels the future warfare between major alliances will mirror the relations between the blocks during the cold war or the time of European Colonialism.
Minor Wars will be the normal state of existence, as alliances continuously have to defend their powerbase against pirates and other harassers.
In short more complexity, more intelligent gameplay and improved small scale PEW PEW for everyone :)
Yeah.. I know.. but remember the cake is a lie.. is it not ?
|
Sellmewarez
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 14:54:00 -
[323]
I could of sworn I saw dev posts saying CCP wanted more NRDS entities in 0.0.
Only now we have the only real NRDS 0.0 entity saying that RoE will be impossible come Dominion
I'd really hate to see that because CVA and co are the only ones doing something unique for players in 0.0 whereas practically everyone else operates the same way.
It will be interesting to see how the changes will work out.
|
Kanatta Jing
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 06:37:00 -
[324]
So the major alliance in 0.0 space are supposed to bring in armies of carebears, about 10 carebears for each regular member.
If you want to try and figure out what would make that feasible, both to carebears and alliance PVPer's I'll point you to this thread here:
Dominion - System Unlock Proposals
Ask for too much rather then too little, that way CCP has stuff to nerf. If theres a possibly broken money making mechanic you would want introduced to the game, this is the place and this is the time.
|
Fahtim Meidires
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 16:37:00 -
[325]
When are we getting another blog that goes into a little more detail? It's been a week now, and having just resubbed for the expansion I think I share the sentiment that we're all anxious for cahnge.
|
Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari Endemic Aggression Exalted.
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 21:09:00 -
[326]
My 5 cents:
Diffuse income (or whatsoever):
I still don't understand why I would need to pay taxes for company I am working for. It just goes against all common sense. Corporations should actually have some kind of corporate activity to create isk instead of taxing individual members.
Upgrading solar systems:
I am assuming upgrades can be attacked/looted by pirates and enemy alliances? If so it would be pretty cool. Upgrades should have also some kind of upkeep instead of automatically just being there. I also want (player made) outposts to blow up tbh.
|
Lucie deMornie
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 07:12:00 -
[327]
Unfortunatly, with this dev blog you (CCP) put all the T2 market in a BIG mess... All the T2 components are going down and the finished T2 products prices are in a complete desorganization since the publication of these informations.
T2 production and invention is not a simple job, at least not as simple as installing a POS on a 0.0 moon) You have to study the market for long hours, buying datacores and invention stuffs, copying BP, produce components at least a couple of week before the day your product will be finished and available on the market. The margin are not so high, considering the amount of time and ISK invested (and the invention probability). As an example the production cost of a Paladin was around 900M (including a 100M BPC), with 10 days of componets production, 2 or 3 days invention, and 2 days of production. Before this annoucment it can be sold on the market at arount 1B therefore net margin=100M (10%). Folowing this "Official CCP announcement", the Paladin market price is down to 900M, ruining all the efforts...
So STOP CHANGING THE RULES DURING THE PLAY !
You want to change the "easy money" from the moon harvesting, but you are ruining all the honorable T2 producers. It takes several month to install an efficient T2 production, so need more stability in the game play and no radical changes every 6 months.
|
lylaal
Caldari D00M.
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 10:54:00 -
[328]
so like when will we be seing any more specific numbers so we actually will know wat we gonna be dealing with when dominion hits.
|
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 13:48:00 -
[329]
With regards to CVA i think a primary part of their arguement is that if they do upgrade their space it will take a lot longer for the increased income it creates to filter through to those who paid for the upgrades because of the way their NRDS policy allows non alliance neutrals free access to their space. Now as has been said previously quite a large proportion of those neutrals go to great lengths to avoid interactions that would allow CVA to generate income, such as refining at CVA stations or selling on CVA markets, thus reducing the amount of benefit CVA would get from their increased infrastructure.
However having said that several points were made in favour of CVA doing the upgrades anyway. Firstly higher quality space will attract more players, especially given the increased safety the NRDS policy allows for more risk adverse miners and ratters who may be unwilling to go to other 0.0 systems, thus increasing the proportion of players using those services which generate income. It also means that CVA gets more money per player using those services, as they will be doing it with higher quality ores and better rat loot.
Overall it seems to me that the upgrades would be beneficial but obviously this isnt based on any sort of hard numbers. Im also not going to address the supercap construction issue as i know next to nothing about 0.0 based industry.
|
Jana Tanaka
Caldari Tanaka Industries Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 15:23:00 -
[330]
Originally by: Lucie deMornie
So STOP CHANGING THE RULES DURING THE PLAY !
In a perfect world it would work like this.
Yet not publishing a devblog would a) limit the stakeholder discussion and feedback about the change. b) limit the knowledge of the change to test server users, simply reducing the number of market speculators, but likely not their impact.
The effect on the markets would still be similar, as we have seen with some other changes before, yet the overall effect on the game would be worse, thanks to the lack of feedback and discussion.
On a similar note though, I had 2 earnest "successes" at building up a very lucrative T2 module production chain. Still on both ocassions some "situation" arised that messed up the t2 market for month, first the POS exploit and now this. It simply ruins the fun of running a proper economic operation ingame, if out of game events regularly mess up the gameplay by screwing the markets for weeks and months.
So to be honest I gave up on producing T2 for profit in an earnest fashion *shrugs* If I do it in the future then it will be for fun ;)
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |