Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Maralek
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 20:31:37 -
[3781] - Quote
i am completely underwhelmed annoyed the game i once new and loved is slowy being dismantled and ruined |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6603
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 20:42:21 -
[3782] - Quote
Maralek wrote:i am completely underwhelmed and annoyed ,the game i once new and loved is slowy being dismantled and ruined, B-R made the news. A couple of cruisers fighting over a stick in the back end of nowhere wont. CCP must hate us Maybe after people like us are gone eve can truly reach it's golden age.
Factional Sovereignty, plexes and all.
Fweddit will turn into the next cfc and we'll become their pets.
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Seven Koskanaiken
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1440
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 20:52:03 -
[3783] - Quote
Kinis Deren wrote:This question is for CCP Fozzie and Team 5 O: I want to raise a concern I have concerning current TCU mechanics that may be used to circumvent the underlying intention of the proposed new sov system and in particular with regards to the of use of the entosis module on TCUs: The Rise of the TrollPOSFrom Evelopedia: Quote:Anchoring: Must be anchored within 300AU of a systems sun; but must not be within 50km of a starbase's control tower. What is to stop a defending alliance from anchoring the TCU near a Deathstar or a Dickstar POS to provide AFK sov defence for a given system? Are there any plans to change the requirements for TCU placement such that they can only be placed (or moved for existing TCUs) to an unoccupied moon?
Ooh sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. |
Freedom Nadd
University of Caille Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 20:54:51 -
[3784] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Maralek wrote:i am completely underwhelmed and annoyed ,the game i once new and loved is slowy being dismantled and ruined, B-R made the news. A couple of cruisers fighting over a stick in the back end of nowhere wont. CCP must hate us Maybe after people like us are gone eve can truly reach it's golden age. Factional Sovereignty, plexes and all. Fweddit will turn into the next cfc and we'll become their pets.
Just get the CFC to drop all its sov, and become nomadic leet - Peeveepee Trolceptors coalition.
Roam across all of nullsec, multiple thousands of interceptors flipping all of nullsec sov on a daily basis.
The tears would be glorious. |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
279
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 21:55:29 -
[3785] - Quote
BL. In Venal. Three goon regions around us. This is gonna be good.
Need Moar Buckitz. |
NoTalent
Are we sitting comfortably The Fearless Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 22:00:59 -
[3786] - Quote
I haven't read all 187 pages of comments, so if this has been suggested then fair enough: why not make the entosis module a one time use only module. Once it has been fired, it can't be used again.
I would also make it unfittable from a mobile depot or any ship, It has to be fitted in a station. If a fleet of ceptors want to go troll sov owners as you put it, they'll have to work a bit harder at it.
|
Godfrey Silvarna
Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light
380
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 22:05:27 -
[3787] - Quote
NoTalent wrote:I haven't read all 187 pages of comments, so if this has been suggested then fair enough: why not make the entosis module a one time use only module. Once it has been fired, it can't be used again.
I would also make it unfittable from a mobile depot or any ship, It has to be fitted in a station. If a fleet of ceptors want to go troll sov owners as you put it, they'll have to work a bit harder at it.
I kind of like this. It would restrict the meta of fleet doctrines that would be viable, since persistent hit-an-run harassment with long range fleets would be difficult, but the restriction might be fairly small, I hope. |
Josef Djugashvilis
2913
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 22:10:12 -
[3788] - Quote
Post deleted, why make fun of Dear Jenny yet again...
This is not a signature.
|
Vic Jefferson
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
202
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 22:27:17 -
[3789] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Would you guys all please unsub now and get it over with so CCP can move forward and away from "Sov Rent Online"? If you would have provided content instead of "blue donut online" none of this would have happened. Your bad I guess.
I don't get the hate. I really don't.
Faction warfare takes care of its participants just fine - so fine in fact that it attracts farmers from all parts of space, because the ISK is honestly so much better and the entry barrier so low. Honestly, FW people are pampered; they have nothing to lose and everything to gain from FW. Compare that to Sov as it is imagined now; barring any interesting Ihub upgrades they have planned, it's all work and no reward.
Some people want Sov to mean something, and some people want to fly something larger than a frigate in an MMO, you know, where you progress over time? Some people also want content that is dynamic, not the pre-packaged, fast-food content that FW represents. This will literally never happen so long as the rewards of Sov are so terrible compared to the now large amount of effort it may take to hold.
A nascent alliance or corp, as it is now, has no motivation to try and take space. They are literally better going to FW space or WH space. Ideally there would be no 'better', as each space should give interesting pluses and minuses.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
Sgt Ocker
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
365
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 22:38:31 -
[3790] - Quote
Godfrey Silvarna wrote:Ugly Eric wrote:So much hate towards CCP. People crying of Fozzie nerfing everything. Yet they fail to see how much more balanced things are now than they were before. "ability to use t1 cruisers were nerfed to oblivion by jump fatigue" Honestly I find claims like that hilarious. T1 cruisers can use gates you know.
You people need to chill out. The proposed sov changes may not create the best ideal sov mechanics, but atleast it will be way better than it is now. Most of players ideas on this thread are outright useless. Though out by narrow minded ppl wanting only to buff their own way of sov living.
I agree that the proposed changes may not be the ideal situation for my way of living, but atleast it stirs the nest. If I would have it my way, it would penaltize ppl of having more sove than they can use. It would nerf lsec FW and hsec incursion incomes so much, that 0.0 would be the only feasable way of keeping your accounts plexed. The occupancy model would include pvp as it's main meter and most important meter. It would let us destroy player built stations. It would make it possible to claim lsec to nullsec and hsec to lsec (and vice versa). It would nerf the living **** out of passive alliance level income and make all income individual level. It would let the supercapitals to be docked. It would introduce more endgame content. It would give older players the edge on on their skillpoints to some usage. But hey. I cant have it my way. I have only the CCP way to play this game with. And yet I keep playing. As are all of you whiney faglets too. And most of you keep doing so. As will I.
Adapt or die. Been the keyphrase in eve for as long as this game has excisted. I hope to damn it will keep doing so. I love you Eric. Eric4CSMXI I fear for the future of eve..
Like how Eric manages to change wording to suit his own need.
Is a little naive if he believes this change does not exactly suit Tri's "previous" way of living and playing in nulsec. Adapt or die, is very apt here, look at the sov map and ask yourself - who is the best looking target ATM, a 15,000 man alliance or a 700 man alliance?
A little whiner - "I can only play how ccp let me" - yet is criticizing others for saying they don't like this change and would like to see it made better. Poking fun at those who would push for a better sov system for all.
And being narrow minded enough to want to nerf the rest of eve to suit him , well, nough said.
Eric 4CSMX1 - NEVER
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
|
|
Drigo Segvian
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
12
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 23:26:01 -
[3791] - Quote
Freedom Nadd wrote:How to fix Nullsec, the 15 point plan.
1. Reduce Highsec incursion spawns to 2.
2. Increase Sansha HP in incursions by 50%.
3. Reduce income curve for HQ's to 20 million at 50 ships.
4. Increase Level 4 mission standing requirement to 7.0, Increase Level 5 mission requirement to 9.0.
5. Add dynamic rat spawning to Level 3 and higher missions, increase mission rat numbers depending on number of ships in fleet (1 ship - normal spawn, 2 ships +75% spawns, 3 ships +200% spawns, 4 ships +350% spawns).
6. Remove State standings for mission agents.
7. Increase high sec ice anomaly respawn timer to 8 hours. Increase low sec ice anomaly respawn timer to 6 hours.
8. Remove any ore above Scordite from high sec.
9. Allow Rorqual class ships in High sec.
10. Remove ALL usable ore from starter systems and 1.0 space.
11. Increase NPC Corp tax to 20%.
12. Increase high sec manufacturing tax by 25%.
13. Decrease high sec refine rate by 25% and increase refine tax by 10%.
14. Remove all exploration combat sites from high sec.
15. Reduce high sec exploration sites by 50%.
Of course, will never happen.
GOOD that it wont |
Vic Jefferson
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
203
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 23:40:51 -
[3792] - Quote
Freedom Nadd wrote:How to fix Nullsec, the 15 point plan.
1. Reduce Highsec incursion spawns to 2.
2. Increase Sansha HP in incursions by 50%.
3. Reduce income curve for HQ's to 20 million at 50 ships.
4. Increase Level 4 mission standing requirement to 7.0, Increase Level 5 mission requirement to 9.0.
5. Add dynamic rat spawning to Level 3 and higher missions, increase mission rat numbers depending on number of ships in fleet (1 ship - normal spawn, 2 ships +75% spawns, 3 ships +200% spawns, 4 ships +350% spawns).
6. Remove State standings for mission agents.
7. Increase high sec ice anomaly respawn timer to 8 hours. Increase low sec ice anomaly respawn timer to 6 hours.
8. Remove any ore above Scordite from high sec.
9. Allow Rorqual class ships in High sec.
10. Remove ALL usable ore from starter systems and 1.0 space.
11. Increase NPC Corp tax to 20%.
12. Increase high sec manufacturing tax by 25%.
13. Decrease high sec refine rate by 25% and increase refine tax by 10%.
14. Remove all exploration combat sites from high sec.
15. Reduce high sec exploration sites by 50%.
Of course, will never happen.
While some of those are indeed good overall things to do, you still need a reason to want Sov over the alternatives. For example, there are lots of big, scary low sec alliances that source their line income either from L5s or FW, and would have the power to take sov if they wanted it under the new system. Key word is, as always, if they wanted to. Simply put, they would be foolish to take on that liability when they can secure a better life and better income where they currently are.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6603
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 23:45:23 -
[3793] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Would you guys all please unsub now and get it over with so CCP can move forward and away from "Sov Rent Online"? If you would have provided content instead of "blue donut online" none of this would have happened. Your bad I guess. I don't get the hate. I really don't. Faction warfare takes care of its participants just fine - so fine in fact that it attracts farmers from all parts of space, because the ISK is honestly so much better and the entry barrier so low. Honestly, FW people are pampered; they have nothing to lose and everything to gain from FW. Compare that to Sov as it is imagined now; barring any interesting Ihub upgrades they have planned, it's all work and no reward. Some people want Sov to mean something, and some people want to fly something larger than a frigate in an MMO, you know, where you progress over time? Some people also want content that is dynamic, not the pre-packaged, fast-food content that FW represents. This will literally never happen so long as the rewards of Sov are so terrible compared to the now large amount of effort it may take to hold. A nascent alliance or corp, as it is now, has no motivation to try and take space. They are literally better going to FW space or WH space. Ideally there would be no 'better', as each space should give interesting pluses and minuses. This may be eve but I still wouldn't recommend trying to go about learning how to hate in eve.
But if you want to, then it probably isn't too hard.
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
7915
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 23:51:10 -
[3794] - Quote
Freedom Nadd wrote:How to fix Nullsec, the 15 point plan.
1. Reduce Highsec incursion spawns to 2.
2. Increase Sansha HP in incursions by 50%.
3. Reduce income curve for HQ's to 20 million at 50 ships.
4. Increase Level 4 mission standing requirement to 7.0, Increase Level 5 mission requirement to 9.0.
5. Add dynamic rat spawning to Level 3 and higher missions, increase mission rat numbers depending on number of ships in fleet (1 ship - normal spawn, 2 ships +75% spawns, 3 ships +200% spawns, 4 ships +350% spawns).
6. Remove State standings for mission agents.
7. Increase high sec ice anomaly respawn timer to 8 hours. Increase low sec ice anomaly respawn timer to 6 hours.
8. Remove any ore above Scordite from high sec.
9. Allow Rorqual class ships in High sec.
10. Remove ALL usable ore from starter systems and 1.0 space.
11. Increase NPC Corp tax to 20%.
12. Increase high sec manufacturing tax by 25%.
13. Decrease high sec refine rate by 25% and increase refine tax by 10%.
14. Remove all exploration combat sites from high sec.
15. Reduce high sec exploration sites by 50%.
Of course, will never happen.
Nerfing high sec to fix null.
Well, isn't that a new and original idea that's not in the least bit stupid. Oh wait...
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass!
|
Julii Hex
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 23:51:51 -
[3795] - Quote
Man I was really hoping this game would go in the direction of world of warcraft so it would be easier on people but these new changes are going to make life in nulsec extremely active, crazy and difficult. People in large alliances are no longer going to feel so safe in their large swaths of nulsec space. Looks like talent will finally trump size. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6605
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 00:36:12 -
[3796] - Quote
Julii Hex wrote:Man I was really hoping this game would go in the direction of world of warcraft so it would be easier on people but these new changes are going to make life in nulsec extremely active, crazy and difficult. People in large alliances are no longer going to feel so safe in their large swaths of nulsec space. Looks like talent will finally trump size. Heh heh heh....
That's the spirit... I think massadeath might welcome this optimism into moa
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
493
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 00:40:07 -
[3797] - Quote
How to fix Null:
1) Disband CFC 2) ???? 3) Profit
amirite? |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6605
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 00:43:20 -
[3798] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:How to fix Null:
1) Disband CFC 2) ???? 3) Profit
amirite? How can CCP or moa disband the cfc, it makes no sense as our security is a bit better than that.
Rather, it should read: 0: End the CFC's 0.0 Dream 1: Watch CFC perish
then you can continue to step 2
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Jenna Frey
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 00:43:21 -
[3799] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:How to fix Null:
1) Disband CFC 2) ???? 3) Profit
amirite?
You sir are an absolute genius. You can quote me on that. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1458
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 00:54:49 -
[3800] - Quote
Freedom Nadd wrote:How to fix Nullsec, the 15 point plan.
1. Reduce Highsec incursion spawns to 2.
2. Increase Sansha HP in incursions by 50%.
3. Reduce income curve for HQ's to 20 million at 50 ships.
4. Increase Level 4 mission standing requirement to 7.0, Increase Level 5 mission requirement to 9.0.
5. Add dynamic rat spawning to Level 3 and higher missions, increase mission rat numbers depending on number of ships in fleet (1 ship - normal spawn, 2 ships +75% spawns, 3 ships +200% spawns, 4 ships +350% spawns).
6. Remove State standings for mission agents.
7. Increase high sec ice anomaly respawn timer to 8 hours. Increase low sec ice anomaly respawn timer to 6 hours.
8. Remove any ore above Scordite from high sec.
9. Allow Rorqual class ships in High sec.
10. Remove ALL usable ore from starter systems and 1.0 space.
11. Increase NPC Corp tax to 20%.
12. Increase high sec manufacturing tax by 25%.
13. Decrease high sec refine rate by 25% and increase refine tax by 10%.
14. Remove all exploration combat sites from high sec.
15. Reduce high sec exploration sites by 50%.
Of course, will never happen. These are fair, reasoned changes.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Alp Khan
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
301
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 00:58:37 -
[3801] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Dracvlad wrote: I was able to earn 108m an hour in Cobalt Edge with a carrier and oracle on grid Wow, 108 mil per hour (54 mil per hour per toon). Nice. In high sec you can use a Mach and make 86 mil per hour doing lvl 3 missions while being protected by CONCORD. So for the cost of using TWO characters and a CAPITAL SHIP that takes months to train for, and while flying in space where the space police won't help you, you get a whopping, mind blowing 22 million isk extra per hour total. Thanks for helping us empirically demonstrate the imbalances we were discussing, imbalances that end up distorting everything ccp tries to do with null sec. Jeez Jenn, let it go man. CCP ain't listening to you.
Jenn makes a point by presenting actual figures and math that can be substantiated. So far, you have brought nothing to the ongoing discussion besides "CCP SAYS SO".
Unless you have a serious intention of starting a new religion with various CCP developers who misread statistics as deities, you are trolling and you will get laughed at.
Meanwhile Jenn and other people who can provide figures and solid arguments can and will continue posting. If you are serious about the religion thing, this is not the place. |
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
494
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 01:10:00 -
[3802] - Quote
But... but... guize.... null makes more isk per hour than any area in the game, we need to nerf it
|
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1502
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 01:13:48 -
[3803] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote: While some of those are indeed good overall things to do, you still need a reason to want Sov over the alternatives. For example, there are lots of big, scary low sec alliances that source their line income either from L5s or FW, and would have the power to take sov if they wanted it under the new system. Key word is, as always, if they wanted to. Simply put, they would be foolish to take on that liability when they can secure a better life and better income where they currently are.
You think that if other parts of space were nerfed silly, people would feed themselves to the big null power blocs instead of just quitting a crap game. That's adorable.
What is "a better life?" What if "a better income" is not as important a variable to some players as it is to you? (More to the point, what if the means necessary to get "a better income" looked like far too much effort to bother with? I'm looking at high sec missions, mostly, but I've been bored silly orbiting buttons, too.) What if people stay in low sec, or high sec, or wormholes, because it suits them better? What if null sec is not the place that you "graduate" to, it's just a play option with a particular flavor?
The simple fact is that if the safe, consistent accumulation of ISK is that important to you, then maybe high sec is where you should be. Leave the risky parts of space for people who enjoy risk. And be sure to post when your oh-so-super-safe bear-mobile is ganked in Osmon.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
Xpaulusx
Naari LLC
299
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 01:14:18 -
[3804] - Quote
Querns wrote:Freedom Nadd wrote:How to fix Nullsec, the 15 point plan.
1. Reduce Highsec incursion spawns to 2.
2. Increase Sansha HP in incursions by 50%.
3. Reduce income curve for HQ's to 20 million at 50 ships.
4. Increase Level 4 mission standing requirement to 7.0, Increase Level 5 mission requirement to 9.0.
5. Add dynamic rat spawning to Level 3 and higher missions, increase mission rat numbers depending on number of ships in fleet (1 ship - normal spawn, 2 ships +75% spawns, 3 ships +200% spawns, 4 ships +350% spawns).
6. Remove State standings for mission agents.
7. Increase high sec ice anomaly respawn timer to 8 hours. Increase low sec ice anomaly respawn timer to 6 hours.
8. Remove any ore above Scordite from high sec.
9. Allow Rorqual class ships in High sec.
10. Remove ALL usable ore from starter systems and 1.0 space.
11. Increase NPC Corp tax to 20%.
12. Increase high sec manufacturing tax by 25%.
13. Decrease high sec refine rate by 25% and increase refine tax by 10%.
14. Remove all exploration combat sites from high sec.
15. Reduce high sec exploration sites by 50%.
Of course, will never happen. These are fair, reasoned changes. I can see new subscriptions soaring under these conditions............Oh wait.
......................................................
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1458
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 01:35:40 -
[3805] - Quote
Xpaulusx wrote:I can see new subscriptions soaring under these conditions............Oh wait. Confirming that new players subscribe to run L4 missions and highsec incursions.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
495
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 01:43:42 -
[3806] - Quote
Querns wrote:Xpaulusx wrote:I can see new subscriptions soaring under these conditions............Oh wait. Confirming that new players subscribe to run L4 missions and highsec incursions.
Clearly that is shown in CCP's reports because This Is Eve had tons of coverage on highsec anything, because it's so exciting!
See! Numbers went up! I can read graphs! |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6609
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 01:48:23 -
[3807] - Quote
But you make graphs... or is that like a state secret
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
357
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 02:02:04 -
[3808] - Quote
Not gonna try and make out that highsec doesn't have some serious isk issues (too much!) but taking an optimal blitzing mission runners setup and saying look how much all of these guys are making is a load of ball I'm afraid.
- Most highsec mission runners don't blitz and most don't run for the faction offering the optimal isk/LP conversion and on that note SoE LP conversion is tanking and has been since the new ships were released last year. Once too many people jump on the isk train for a single type of LP, it devalues. Feel free to check out the downward trends on pretty much all the items from their store (probes and launchers, virtue implants and faction ships). If everyone was running optimal setups for SoE LP then it would have bottomed out ages ago and we'd be looking at minimal LP returns. Fair enough it is currently at 2k/LP so no-one can whine, but it won't be for long.
- You're comparing afk drone boats against someone flying a machariel at pretty much perfect efficiency for a spreadsheet scoreboard - it's apples and oranges.
- Sorry but moongoo. I know it's not a personal income but it's a net profit for that individual if they don't have to expend on pvp ships because of SRP paid for passively by moon goo.
I do still think highsec earns far too much for the risk involved but I just wanted to point out some *serious* issues with your methods of comparison. |
Mark Messier
Universal Mining And Manufactoring
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 02:08:50 -
[3809] - Quote
Literally Space Moses wrote:You made sov harder to hold (good) but didn't give any additional incentive to actually hold it (very bad),
Seriously, you keep giving nullsec the stick, when is the carrot going to come?
Forget the carrot! all you health nut jobs can keep your carrot!
I want the CAKE!!!!!mmmmCAKE!!!
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
183
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 02:15:37 -
[3810] - Quote
Querns wrote:Xpaulusx wrote:I can see new subscriptions soaring under these conditions............Oh wait. Confirming that new players subscribe to run L4 missions and highsec incursions.
but but but.. ccp is removing missions since they said to someone who said to another but but but...oh wait
fozzie should nerf incursion income fozzie should nerf missions........oh wait he did fozzie should nerf research agents........oh wait he did fozzie should nerf himself.................i'll wait. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |