Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pr1ncess Alia
|
Posted - 2010.08.31 17:16:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 31/08/2010 17:17:19 ITT: MatrixSkye continues to fear for the safety of his macro botting alts being able to poll local.
also
I like the idea about making the no local thing a structure/upgrade.
However, how about the flip side? No local in 0.0, unless you maintain a structure/upgrade. The systems with those structures CAN have local.
Not that story is a great reason for any balance, but it would make sense. Empires provide local in their space. You have to provide your own local in your 0.0 space.
I think a decently delayed local would be ok too. Or just a local count (average for 1hour/40min/15min/5min/whatever)
but don't aske matrix. this gives all the advantages to the PREDATORS and the innocent prey trying to mine and rat will BE OBLITERATED AND THE GAME WILL BE RUINED AND NO ONE WILL EVER RAT AGAIN OHNOES!!!!11
--- Players are losing faith and loyalty in CCP due previous expansions not living up to player expectations. The CSM and CCP agreed that expectation management can be improved |
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.08.31 17:40:00 -
[62]
There are so few ways to get to know other pilots who play at the same time you do outside of your corp that it would be a shame to take away a the key tool of automatically seeing who is in local.
Places feel "populated" when you see the same names each night . Hardly anyone gabs but still its more natural to convo or say something in local when you see them each night.
But "chatting" isn't really the purpose.. its getting to know who your advesaries are, where they live, when thy're comign through that makes a richer rivalrie and sense of place.
I understand the desire for more small combat and target... I want them ... but all the threads on this have convinced me that the end result will have the risk adverse avoid even more parts of space... instead of docking up in local they'll be behind an iron curtain of bubbles with a scout at the head of a dead-end nook.. or just send more people back to empire to earn their isk.
So, don't throw out a key element of making this a game I play with thousands of other players and hundres of names that I'll recognize. It would be a high cost to pay for something thats likely to have very little befefit for its the intended purpose.
|
Analissa Fiora
|
Posted - 2010.08.31 17:49:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Diomedes Calypso but all the threads on this have convinced me that the end result will have the risk adverse avoid even more parts of space... instead of docking up in local they'll be behind an iron curtain of bubbles with a scout at the head of a dead-end nook.. or just send more people back to empire to earn their isk.
1. remove local 2. move L3s and L4s to lowsec 3. remove all roid belts from hisec
this will solve all the major problems of eve. this will make it that awesome game it once promised to be.
|
Jovialmadness
|
Posted - 2010.08.31 18:08:00 -
[64]
Edited by: Jovialmadness on 31/08/2010 18:09:01 Now for the first time ever i like an idea on this subject.
Ships with either the built in ability to prevent you from appearing in local OR a module that prevents you from appearing in local. Possibly a subsystem on a T3.
Annnd of course defenders with modules/probes that can detect these players and make them visible in local.
Since i dont rat and hunt ratters/plexers/anybody not docked im pro local removal anyway. Just gotta figure out a way to make it not broken. |
Jimmmy Jones
|
Posted - 2010.08.31 23:44:00 -
[65]
Meh, might as well make blackops gangs standard. No local, no way to see on dscan, no way to find or identify cloakers....might as well make undetectable blackops completely OP, as a cloaky blackops gang would be impossible to identify when they are assembeling somewhere in jump range, and impossible to detect thier forward cynotackle.
Although I'd entertain the no/limited local idea with a method to identify cloakies, I just cannot see any form of balance without local and with cloakies.
Regardless of how you cut it people in null need someway to identify threats, and "place visual scouts on every gate for intel" is so incredibly laughable as far as plausibilty it's ridiculous. I know I live in a 6 gate system, and certainly dont have 6 people who will sit on thier ass and stare at a screen for the remote possibilty that someone jumps in. Even this wouldnt work for people who jump into a system and log there, only to come back later completely unidentifiable.
The "oh well it workes for WH's" argument dosent cut it as you can easily control the passage in WH systems by using a combunation of destabilizing the connection WH's and keeping an eye on probes for new ones. Without these however nullsec would become so dangerous that even I, who REALLY hates highsec, would move back there rather than obsessively spam d-scan in the remote possibility that my enemyn is both not a cloaker and not in a ship that can land and tackle before I align and warp (fat chance)
|
Psymn
|
Posted - 2010.08.31 23:51:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Razin Edited by: Razin on 31/08/2010 13:52:45
Originally by: Psymn Lol, theres other ways on top of local to see if a system is populated. The attacking party wouldnt need local to know people are there. This would leave the attackers in the same situation as monkey, knowing there were people there, while those people would be completely unaware they were being stalked. Unless you are also advocating the complete removal of all intel tools from the map, published km's, streamed system stats, intel channels and regular chat windows too no doubt.
That makes no sense. The ôother waysö are delayed and inaccurate. The Monkeysphere was able to hide himself from local while receiving localÆs immediate intel benefit regarding his targets. This is drastically different from delayed local for *everyone*. If you canÆt see this IÆm afraid I canÆt help you.
All an attacker needs to know is that there are people in a system. The actual works comes from 20 seconds of scan probing, given that they already know a system is busy they are in the same situation as monkey. All that is left for them to do is 20 seconds of scan probing and they get to systematically do billions of isk damage as per monkey...
|
Psymn
|
Posted - 2010.08.31 23:53:00 -
[67]
Originally by: RuleoftheBone Then all your **** fit ratting boats belong to me rofl
Well thats the point isnt it? All the ratting boats, all the miners and all other slow/non pvp assets belong to the pirates if local is removed. At least this guy has the honesty to admit that even if he doesnt have the intelligence to realise that admitting it weakens his argument.
|
Psymn
|
Posted - 2010.08.31 23:59:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Psymn on 31/08/2010 23:59:00
Originally by: Analissa Fiora
Originally by: Diomedes Calypso but all the threads on this have convinced me that the end result will have the risk adverse avoid even more parts of space... instead of docking up in local they'll be behind an iron curtain of bubbles with a scout at the head of a dead-end nook.. or just send more people back to empire to earn their isk.
1. remove local 2. move L3s and L4s to lowsec 3. remove all roid belts from hisec
this will solve all the major problems of eve. this will make it that awesome game it once promised to be.
HAHAHA, The awesome game where you get to pop pve fits and miners night after night? Sad, really sad.
|
Mr Epeen
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 00:42:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Stick Cult Edited by: Stick Cult on 29/08/2010 20:31:10
Originally by: Jack Torrence hm, hows this, piloting certain ship types (covops, blackops, stealthbombers) would give u the option not to appear in local chat.
that would allow a more "sophisticated" intelgathering in 0.0 space
just a thought
I'd be fine with just "if you jump into a system with a black ops jump portal you don't appear in local".....
edit: ya know, make covert operations actually covert...
I agree 86.5%
Sucks to train up for Black Ops and when you jump into a system you suddenly realize there is a beacon on your ship screaming 'HERE I AM!!!'.
That said, it would also be nice to show up in local if I wish it (If you type in chat you show up normally). Just because it's fun to sit cloaked in a system and have everyone scramble to dock up. Then proceed to slag you in local not knowing that you are out walking the dog.
It's the simple things that make life in null an enjoyable experience.
Mr Epeen
|
Lost Greybeard
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 01:08:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Meat Bucket Local is dumb, nerf it.
You have the option to play without local, you know. Wormhole space is pretty much exactly whe the anti-local whiners are asking for... and yet I don't ever see 'em in there. Huh. Bloody hypocrites.
|
|
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 07:14:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Lost Greybeard
Originally by: Meat Bucket Local is dumb, nerf it.
You have the option to play without local, you know. Wormhole space is pretty much exactly whe the anti-local whiners are asking for... and yet I don't ever see 'em in there. Huh. Bloody hypocrites.
+ 1
|
William Walker
Amarr House Celtae
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 07:20:00 -
[72]
If you don't want local just minimize it. ________________________________________________
|
Illwill Bill
Svea Rike Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 08:42:00 -
[73]
But... that would mean AFK cloakers would not be able to scare ratters off anymore?
|
RuleoftheBone
Minmatar Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 10:16:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Lost Greybeard
Originally by: Meat Bucket Local is dumb, nerf it.
You have the option to play without local, you know. Wormhole space is pretty much exactly whe the anti-local whiners are asking for... and yet I don't ever see 'em in there. Huh. Bloody hypocrites.
Slightly more serious post than my previous one. After well over 4 years of active play including:
-Blowing up stuff in 0.0 (including leading 200-400 man fleets to victory in generally boring fleet fights and POS bash's).
-Blowing up stuff in losec.
-Blowing up a bit in hisec (station games=meh)
-Countless roams in all the above in solo/small gang mode.
I can honestly say the most fun is found in WH's simply due to the actual challenge presented by no local/ship mass restrictions/general overall sneak level required as well as the the NPC opportunities (Sleeper AI is actually pretty neat).
But I wouldn't force the no local down anyone throats. I just find the arguements against eliminating local in nullsec laughable from supposed "powerful peeveepee oriented" alliances where the reality is 10% fight and the rest rat/plex (unless its PL or Hydra types ofc).
|
Nedefeg
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 11:00:00 -
[75]
so...no local..
park covops alt in a known bear hub )just check rat kills on map or upg lvls on system)
go out/work/sleep/do stuff on main whatever
check covops`s probes (20sec)
cyno in a few cheap BC
profit?
Fact is that untill the entire PvE is revized so PvE boats can pvp aswell , any attempt at nerfing bears in 0.0 will just make them go highsec
I know all my rating toons would hit highsec the moment local would go away
funy enough the same people who advocate no local ussualy are pro perma-cloaking alts.... (or highsec an equivalent nerf) to justify any sort of PvE in 0.0 if local would go away TL.DR 0.0 would need at least a 200% increas in pprofit
|
Nedefeg
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 11:03:00 -
[76]
...in order to justify and PvE there if local would die off
Sure i`d like more ganks on long roams where all you see are macros that SS/cloak...but....i`ll take my chanches any day with ppl actually beeing in 0.0 and pve`ing there then havin no 0.0 pve at all
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 16:57:00 -
[77]
Edited by: Razin on 01/09/2010 16:58:22
Originally by: Psymn
Originally by: Razin
That makes no sense. The ôother waysö are delayed and inaccurate. The Monkeysphere was able to hide himself from local while receiving localÆs immediate intel benefit regarding his targets. This is drastically different from delayed local for *everyone*. If you canÆt see this IÆm afraid I canÆt help you.
All an attacker needs to know is that there are people in a system. The actual works comes from 20 seconds of scan probing, given that they already know a system is busy they are in the same situation as monkey. All that is left for them to do is 20 seconds of scan probing and they get to systematically do billions of isk damage as per monkey...
What's stopping you from moving from system to system once in a while to avoid being found using the map intel? You are severely underestimating the difference in usefulness for instant and delayed (by 30 min at least) intel.
Even if you don't move, your ships scanner is perfectly able to warn you of an incoming threat. Judging from CCP statements on a requirement to update scanning mechanics for delayed local, one would hope the scanning process would be somewhat more convenient than the current button-mashing. ...
|
Psymn
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 19:23:00 -
[78]
Edited by: Psymn on 01/09/2010 19:23:58
Originally by: Razin Edited by: Razin on 01/09/2010 16:58:22
Originally by: Psymn
Originally by: Razin
That makes no sense. The ôother waysö are delayed and inaccurate. The Monkeysphere was able to hide himself from local while receiving localÆs immediate intel benefit regarding his targets. This is drastically different from delayed local for *everyone*. If you canÆt see this IÆm afraid I canÆt help you.
All an attacker needs to know is that there are people in a system. The actual works comes from 20 seconds of scan probing, given that they already know a system is busy they are in the same situation as monkey. All that is left for them to do is 20 seconds of scan probing and they get to systematically do billions of isk damage as per monkey...
What's stopping you from moving from system to system once in a while to avoid being found using the map intel? You are severely underestimating the difference in usefulness for instant and delayed (by 30 min at least) intel.
Even if you don't move, your ships scanner is perfectly able to warn you of an incoming threat. Judging from CCP statements on a requirement to update scanning mechanics for delayed local, one would hope the scanning process would be somewhat more convenient than the current button-mashing.
Yes, but if the new scan system means you have ample time to see someone coming, and warp out then whats the point really?
If it means that you dont have time to warp out then the population of null goes down 90% and you will never get your precious pvp vs pve kills no matter what tactics you employ.
If you want pvp, you should not remove people ability to get out of poorly suited ships and into pvp fits if they so wish to engage you.
Also, moving around from system to system is not always an option, nullsec corps/alliances do not function like null roaming gangs...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 03:14:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Psymn
Yes, but if the new scan system means you have ample time to see someone coming, and warp out then whats the point really?
The point is shorter range, and that makes all the difference. A fast warping ship would have a chance of catching a heavy ratter, which may force ratters to fit for pvp. Current 100% safety requiring nothing but instant local with infinite range is poor game mechanics.
Originally by: Psymn Also, moving around from system to system is not always an option, nullsec corps/alliances do not function like null roaming gangs...
That's a logistical and infrastructure problem for the entity in question. New game mechanics would force new arrangements. 0.0 should impose some real drawbacks. Current 0.0 is safer then lowsec space. ...
|
Rajheen Orlox
Gallente Vogon Construction Fatal Ascension
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 03:41:00 -
[80]
I'd just like to see friendlies removed from local at the flick of a radio button, making hostiles a lot easier to see.
If there are more than say ten and a red comes in with a name like Xylon, well you are screwed if you aint scrolling up and down that list every few seconds.
Give us a filter out for blues or reds or neuts button.
|
|
Thrasymachus TheSophist
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 04:12:00 -
[81]
Just make frigates invisible to local.
|
Sealiah
Minmatar Coffee Lovers Brewing Club Aegis Militia
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 09:21:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Jack Torrence hm, hows this, piloting certain ship types (covops, blackops, stealthbombers) would give u the option not to appear in local chat.
that would allow a more "sophisticated" intelgathering in 0.0 space
just a thought
Yes if we finally get probes that can track down cloaky ships.
Or maybe make it a very hard to fit module, that could work nice. For example a high slot module that works a bit passive, it's on untill you turn it off, but you can only turn it off by offlining it, not just pressing on it. But while the module is online, you would not be able to use any other modules that require activation. I'd argument that very easily - the very, very sophisticated device that erases you from the local generates a field that can be completely disrupted by any module, even a cloaking device.
This way people would have to chose - vanish from local and risk getting scanned down, or be protected against sccanning down but on the other hand be in local. |
Fanatic Row
Neo T.E.C.H.
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 11:57:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Analissa Fiora
1. remove local 2. move L3s and L4s to lowsec 3. remove all roid belts from hisec
this will solve all the major problems of eve. this will make it that awesome game it once promised to be.
LOL
Yeah right. If anyone is as clueless as this guy about what an MMO environment that heavily favors PvP does to an MMO, go look up Shadowbane please.
EVE does not thrive as a cold hard universe, in spite of the mechanics that allow carebears to escape PvP if they take certain precautions, it does so because of it.
|
Psymn
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 13:17:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Psymn
Yes, but if the new scan system means you have ample time to see someone coming, and warp out then whats the point really?
The point is shorter range, and that makes all the difference. A fast warping ship would have a chance of catching a heavy ratter, which may force ratters to fit for pvp. Current 100% safety requiring nothing but instant local with infinite range is poor game mechanics.
Originally by: Psymn Also, moving around from system to system is not always an option, nullsec corps/alliances do not function like null roaming gangs...
That's a logistical and infrastructure problem for the entity in question. New game mechanics would force new arrangements. 0.0 should impose some real drawbacks. Current 0.0 is safer then lowsec space.
100% safe you say? Im sorry but you have just established your complete ineptitude where statistics are concerned. 100% safety would only be true if no ratters / industrials had ever been popped in the history of eve.
As for ratting with pvp fits, pvp usually required buffer tanks or cap boosted active tanks so at what point would it be possible to tank rats for more than a couple of minutes in either of those fits? This exposes your bias in this respect.
0.0 doenst need fundamental drawbacks, the appeal of null is that all consequences of player actions are dictated by other players and their agreements. Just being in null sec doesnt mean that there is no way of avoiding being popped whenever a pirate enters system.
All in all, you need to ask yourself if you want a null sec where you can get kills when you work for them, or at least good fights when people decide to engage you in pvp fits. Or you want a system where anyone not in a pvp fit will die at the whim of a pirate but you will never get any pvp since everyone who needs to rat for isk moved back to empire...
|
Psymn
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 13:29:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Sealiah
Originally by: Jack Torrence hm, hows this, piloting certain ship types (covops, blackops, stealthbombers) would give u the option not to appear in local chat.
that would allow a more "sophisticated" intelgathering in 0.0 space
just a thought
Yes if we finally get probes that can track down cloaky ships.
Or maybe make it a very hard to fit module, that could work nice. For example a high slot module that works a bit passive, it's on untill you turn it off, but you can only turn it off by offlining it, not just pressing on it. But while the module is online, you would not be able to use any other modules that require activation. I'd argument that very easily - the very, very sophisticated device that erases you from the local generates a field that can be completely disrupted by any module, even a cloaking device.
This way people would have to chose - vanish from local and risk getting scanned down, or be protected against sccanning down but on the other hand be in local.
This is a close to balanced as i think something like this would get. It could also have the side effect where if you forgot to disable the module in empire, people could pop you with no concord intervention since the ship beacon that populates local with your presence is the same beacon that alerts concord to your status when attacked.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 14:26:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Psymn 100% safe you say? Im sorry but you have just established your complete ineptitude where statistics are concerned. 100% safety would only be true if no ratters / industrials had ever been popped in the history of eve.
See, thatÆs where we differ. I am talking about game mechanics while you keep thinking æstatisticsÆ. Perhaps once you understand the difference we can move on in this discussion.
Current game mechanics allow for 100% safety for a ratter or a miner in a 0.0 system. The fact that many still get killed has to do with human factors. After all, people do get killed in highsec missions (maybe because they fell asleep).
Originally by: Psymn As for ratting with pvp fits, pvp usually required buffer tanks or cap boosted active tanks so at what point would it be possible to tank rats for more than a couple of minutes in either of those fits? This exposes your bias in this respect.
IÆve ratted in a pvp fit, itÆs no big deal. In fact my first 0.0 solo kill happened while I was ratting. So I know itÆs perfectly possible, if not optimal for best time vs. profit. But then this is risk vs. reward.
Originally by: Psymn 0.0 doenst need fundamental drawbacks, the appeal of null is that all consequences of player actions are dictated by other players and their agreements. Just being in null sec doesnt mean that there is no way of avoiding being popped whenever a pirate enters system.
I agree about the æappealÆ, and this would not change with delayed local. What will change is some of the unwritten rules in territory control and interaction between alliances. The change by no means gives the æpirateÆ a 100% chance of catching anyone (I don't see how you arrive at this conclusion).
Originally by: Psymn All in all, you need to ask yourself if you want a null sec where you can get kills when you work for them, or at least good fights when people decide to engage you in pvp fits. Or you want a system where anyone not in a pvp fit will die at the whim of a pirate but you will never get any pvp since everyone who needs to rat for isk moved back to empire...
I disagree that implementing delayed local vs. not doing it is equivalent to the dichotomy you presented.
...
|
Darwpromtheus
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 14:32:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Jane Vherokior If they're going to screw with Local, I'd be all for removing it completely. Make people learn and rely on directional and probe scanning to see if they're alone or not.
This.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 14:35:00 -
[88]
Edited by: Razin on 02/09/2010 14:35:13
Originally by: Psymn It could also have the side effect where if you forgot to disable the module in empire, people could pop you with no concord intervention since the ship beacon that populates local with your presence is the same beacon that alerts concord to your status when attacked.
This is the epitome of a militant carebear thinking: the game should punish anyone for even thinking about assaulting me! ...
|
Psymn
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 14:44:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Razin Edited by: Razin on 02/09/2010 14:35:13
Originally by: Psymn It could also have the side effect where if you forgot to disable the module in empire, people could pop you with no concord intervention since the ship beacon that populates local with your presence is the same beacon that alerts concord to your status when attacked.
This is the epitome of a militant carebear thinking: the game should punish anyone for even thinking about assaulting me!
Not it would just be consistant. There would be nothing making you activate this mod in empire, so im surprised by your response here...
|
Psymn
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 15:01:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Psymn 100% safe you say? Im sorry but you have just established your complete ineptitude where statistics are concerned. 100% safety would only be true if no ratters / industrials had ever been popped in the history of eve.
See, thatÆs where we differ. I am talking about game mechanics while you keep thinking æstatisticsÆ. Perhaps once you understand the difference we can move on in this discussion.
Current game mechanics allow for 100% safety for a ratter or a miner in a 0.0 system. The fact that many still get killed has to do with human factors. After all, people do get killed in highsec missions (maybe because they fell asleep).
Then the system is ok then?!?! If it were introduced that an ECCM'd interceptor could lock down a pve ship already taking large dps from rats before that ratter could see the hostile (which is what you are endorsing, though no doubt you will say you are not, again), then that will be the tactic that all pirates will employ reducing the survival chance of an observant ratter from 100% to 0%. Also, no pvp/pve hybrid can compete well with a pure pvp fit, otherwise people would all fly pvp/pve hybrid fits lol.
Also, on this point. A properly executed and scouted gank can get a properly fit interceptor into an anomaly or belt before larger ships can warp. This combined with a good/lucky warp in point can easily yield kills.
Right now, the darwinistic approach works well, only the people who are weakened at the moment of an attack lose.
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Psymn As for ratting with pvp fits, pvp usually required buffer tanks or cap boosted active tanks so at what point would it be possible to tank rats for more than a couple of minutes in either of those fits? This exposes your bias in this respect.
IÆve ratted in a pvp fit, itÆs no big deal. In fact my first 0.0 solo kill happened while I was ratting. So I know itÆs perfectly possible, if not optimal for best time vs. profit. But then this is risk vs. reward.
Wheres the risk for pirates? You are asking people to risk t2 battleships or worse while all you risk is a tackler and couple of cheap t1 cruisers/battle cruisers... Again you fail to understand the meaning of balance.
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Psymn 0.0 doenst need fundamental drawbacks, the appeal of null is that all consequences of player actions are dictated by other players and their agreements. Just being in null sec doesnt mean that there is no way of avoiding being popped whenever a pirate enters system.
I agree about the æappealÆ, and this would not change with delayed local. What will change is some of the unwritten rules in territory control and interaction between alliances. The change by no means gives the æpirateÆ a 100% chance of catching anyone (I don't see how you arrive at this conclusion).
No thats true, if someone was locked down but the tacklers backup was completely fail, there is a small chance they will not gank you before you can get your own people into pvp ships to chase off the tackler.
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Psymn All in all, you need to ask yourself if you want a null sec where you can get kills when you work for them, or at least good fights when people decide to engage you in pvp fits. Or you want a system where anyone not in a pvp fit will die at the whim of a pirate but you will never get any pvp since everyone who needs to rat for isk moved back to empire...
I disagree that implementing delayed local vs. not doing it is equivalent to the dichotomy you presented.
You disagree that there will be a lot less people in null? I can make 50mil isk/hour in empire just missioning, all things considered. If i have to replace a ship or three every week, the reward side of null quickly loses its edge. This would be the same for most people, More so the miners.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |