Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
2648
|
Posted - 2016.07.19 15:06:02 -
[31] - Quote
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:...in a way that would allow us to wreck highsec even more. Wait...I thought you guys were *saving* high sec... *dreams shattered* Obviously we are saving highsec. Unfortunately it is in such a state that we have to burn it down first and then rebuild from scratch.
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
Rad Cer
Prievoz
3
|
Posted - 2016.07.19 15:49:30 -
[32] - Quote
It is illogical and unrealistic when frigate with 500m3 move cargo from wreck with volume 60 000m3 to another ship in one step. When frigate after looting turn to suspect, then the loot had to be on board of the frigate. But this not true, player in frigate move loot direct to fleet hangar - and then must be suspect player in ship with fleet hangar. Or frigate move loot first to its board, turn to suspect, and then move loot to fleet hangar of second ship.
Solution is easy: player can move contents to fleet hangar only from his own ship.
Besides that, stealed loot should be illegal goods and everyone with illegal goods on board should be suspect. The same mechanic like someone steal loot from wreck or container.
Otherwise every idiot can be succesfull ganker.
|
Kip Winger
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2016.07.19 15:53:53 -
[33] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:Unfortunately there is nothing you can do that will not easily be circumvented by using other containers and/or put those that use fleet hangers as risked at being suspect flagged through no action of their own. There is no point wasting development time on an attempted solution that will just be circumvented almost as easily, or make using fleet hangers much more risky to solve this.
The correct solution is to make the goods themselves "stolen" and holding them turn you suspect rather than the flag being given for just looting. Perhaps then stolen flag can be then removed from the goods at a station for a small fee or after some time. But unfortunately the database doesn't work that way and giving items that flag isn't possible so we are left with a system where players can launder the stolen goods in space.
There are other options though. If you are trying to mess with gankers, their looters are doing nothing that you can't also do. You too can steal the loot with minimal risk using an noobship. It's maybe a little more risk than sitting there behind the protection of CONCORD in a fast-locking ship waiting for a target to go suspect so you can shoot them like fish in a barrel, but not much. Just get a friend with a fleet hanger and scoop the loot before the gankers. Or scoop it in a combat ship, stabbed hauler or one of the many other ways you can grab the loot.
It always comes back to the fact that if you give players safety, the bad guys will find ways to use that safety against other players. Moving goods around highsec is extremely safe so in the end there is not much you are going to be able to do once the loot has been scooped. In this case, the pirate is the one who can secure the goods using safety of highsec giving the anti-gankers a taste of the problem of removing loot from another player who is under the protection of highsec mechanics.
I agree with you the best way is to tie the goods to be suspect. And yes, I was leaving the existing timer running. I would even say once they dock, the suspect timer would be clear on the goods... cause who knows what happens in those stations. :)
In space it would just sit there as a yellow wreck, and if you grab it and eject it.. its a yellow can. Then the normal cleaning of cans take place at downtime.
It really is not a huge change, there are details that need to work out and you bring up good points. Its just a way to keep things consistent, so a mechanic for POS systems are not being abused to loot a wreck. |
Kip Winger
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2016.07.19 16:04:52 -
[34] - Quote
Ima Wreckyou wrote:afk phone wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:Anti ganking back at what they are doing best: crying on the forums.
Thanks for your tears OP If you take a step back and look at the big picture. They are changing the game in ways that are ruining the way you choose to play it. They aren't actually whining, they are a slow methodical steam roller that is outright flattening you play style. Don't call them whiners, call them winners! (it's more accurate) Delicious! Not sure why you call whining to the developers to change the game because you are to bad at it to win if they don't change it in your favor "winning". Must be some new thing from another generation. Also just to be clear, I am almost always in favor of the ideas the anti-gankers bring up to fix something, since they are usually so stupid it would completely break the game in a way that would allow us to wreck highsec even more.
Wreck highsec... quite the drama you make up! Cats and Dogs living together. Wrath of god!
Tears are absent of this post, just there desire to make the game fair for gankers and for everyone else. |
Paranoid Loyd
9249
|
Posted - 2016.07.19 16:10:40 -
[35] - Quote
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:gank the bustard? Nope you bump it with one ship while ganking the noobship with another, alternatively use a BR and take the loot before they can even do their dance.
Fix the Prospect! New Server Hardware!
|
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
2648
|
Posted - 2016.07.19 16:41:44 -
[36] - Quote
Kip Winger wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote: Also just to be clear, I am almost always in favor of the ideas the anti-gankers bring up to fix something, since they are usually so stupid it would completely break the game in a way that would allow us to wreck highsec even more.
Wreck highsec... quite the drama you make up! Cats and Dogs living together. Wrath of god! Tears are absent of this post, just there desire to make the game fair for gankers and for everyone else. You must be new and don't understand how this works.
Threads calling for nerfs or buffs to your specific playstyle because you can't cut it with the current rules are by definition tears. Not to be confused with concerns about upcoming changes not yet in the game which is something completely different. You anti-ganker seam to confuse the two a lot. Well you are so bad in the game why should it be different in the forums...
Having experienced multiple nerf iterations I can tell you how this will work out. You obviously expect everything will stay the same and you get a bunch of yellow haulers to kill. That's not what will happen.
In the best case scenario the gankers will adapt, everything will be more or less the same and you will be back on the forums crying for the next nerf. That is how it usually works.
In any other case it will most likely introduce a new game mechanic which is confusing or completely unknown to most people except those who actually care about how the game works, like for example the "gankers", and which can potentially be used against all the carebears who did not bother to read the patch notes in the first place.
Like the options? not? why not start to work with the current game mechanics today? If anti-ganking would actually do something and not constantly lose and seriously suck at the game we wouldn't have another thread about wreck looting since the hauler would still be alive. This whole thread is a testament to your inability to actually prevent ganks.
I mean all you can do is whore on CONCORD killmails for ships who will be killed by NPCs anyway. I don't believe for a second that you will actually shoot if the looter is in something else than a noob ship. You will probably start crying fo NPC assistance against suspect targets or something.
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
Kip Winger
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2016.07.19 16:51:49 -
[37] - Quote
Ima Wreckyou wrote:Kip Winger wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote: Also just to be clear, I am almost always in favor of the ideas the anti-gankers bring up to fix something, since they are usually so stupid it would completely break the game in a way that would allow us to wreck highsec even more.
Wreck highsec... quite the drama you make up! Cats and Dogs living together. Wrath of god! Tears are absent of this post, just there desire to make the game fair for gankers and for everyone else. You must be new and don't understand how this works. Threads calling for nerfs or buffs to your specific playstyle because you can't cut it with the current rules are by definition tears. Not to be confused with concerns about upcoming changes not yet in the game which is something completely different. You anti-ganker seam to confuse the two a lot. Well you are so bad in the game why should it be different in the forums... Having experienced multiple nerf iterations I can tell you how this will work out. You obviously expect everything will stay the same and you get a bunch of yellow haulers to kill. That's not what will happen. In the best case scenario the gankers will adapt, everything will be more or less the same and you will be back on the forums crying for the next nerf. That is how it usually works. In any other case it will most likely introduce a new game mechanic which is confusing or completely unknown to most people except those who actually care about how the game works, like for example the "gankers", and which can potentially be used against all the carebears who did not bother to read the patch notes in the first place. Like the options? not? why not start to work with the current game mechanics today? If anti-ganking would actually do something and not constantly lose and seriously suck at the game we wouldn't have another thread about wreck looting since the hauler would still be alive. This whole thread is a testament to your inability to actually prevent ganks. I mean all you can do is whore on CONCORD killmails for ships who will be killed by NPCs anyway. I don't believe for a second that you will actually shoot if the looter is in something else than a noob ship. You will probably start crying fo NPC assistance against suspect targets or something.
Ganker calm down.
First.. not new... 2nd, I am sure you will adapt.. The point is not to get around a mechanic as stated for POS systems. Not moving ganked loot into a hauler bypassing the Suspect flag.
You stated nothing else on topic. Disregarding. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1910
|
Posted - 2016.07.19 18:37:03 -
[38] - Quote
Rad Cer wrote:It is illogical and unrealistic when frigate with 500m3 move cargo from wreck with volume 60 000m3 to another ship in one step. When frigate after looting turn to suspect, then the loot had to be on board of the frigate. But this not true, player in frigate move loot direct to fleet hangar - and then must be suspect player in ship with fleet hangar. Or frigate move loot first to its board, turn to suspect, and then move loot to fleet hangar of second ship.
Solution is easy: player can move contents to fleet hangar only from his own ship.
Besides that, stealed loot should be illegal goods and everyone with illegal goods on board should be suspect. The same mechanic like someone steal loot from wreck or container.
Otherwise "every idiots ALWAYS wins"
Actually this would be the best thing to do, good idea.
COHE, the Coalition of Hisec Entities is now in operation, time to make hisec work for people who operate there.
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance
16912
|
Posted - 2016.07.20 11:55:52 -
[39] - Quote
I still think unfucking crime watch as a whole is a better idea.
Better the Devil you know.
=]|[=
|
Brokk Witgenstein
Extreme Agony The Wraithguard.
421
|
Posted - 2016.07.20 12:11:46 -
[40] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:I still think unfucking crime watch as a whole is a better idea.
How? |
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
26332
|
Posted - 2016.07.20 15:22:35 -
[41] - Quote
Making the loot instead of the act is certainly possible, it would involve an extra database field for every single item in the game to carry the illegally/legally looted flag, unfortunately the overhead on the database would be prohibitive and cause more problems than it solves.
TL;DR CCP could fix it, but it's not necessarily a good idea for them to do so.
Civilized behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business.
Nil mortifi sine lucre.
|
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources Silent Infinity
217
|
Posted - 2016.07.20 18:04:06 -
[42] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Making the loot instead of the act is certainly possible, it would involve an extra database field for every single item in the game to carry the illegally/legally looted flag, unfortunately the overhead on the database would be prohibitive and cause more problems than it solves.
TL;DR CCP could fix it, but it's not necessarily a good idea for them to do so. Don't worry, there are much less ressource intensive ways to implement this.
Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
|
Valkin Mordirc
2204
|
Posted - 2016.07.20 18:25:20 -
[43] - Quote
Sarah Flynt wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Making the loot instead of the act is certainly possible, it would involve an extra database field for every single item in the game to carry the illegally/legally looted flag, unfortunately the overhead on the database would be prohibitive and cause more problems than it solves.
TL;DR CCP could fix it, but it's not necessarily a good idea for them to do so. Don't worry, there are much less ressource intensive ways to implement this.
Since you seem so confident in how the Legacy Code works and how the servers handle stress. Please explain?
#DeleteTheWeak
|
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources Silent Infinity
217
|
Posted - 2016.07.21 00:47:22 -
[44] - Quote
Valkin Mordirc wrote:Sarah Flynt wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Making the loot instead of the act is certainly possible, it would involve an extra database field for every single item in the game to carry the illegally/legally looted flag, unfortunately the overhead on the database would be prohibitive and cause more problems than it solves.
TL;DR CCP could fix it, but it's not necessarily a good idea for them to do so. Don't worry, there are much less ressource intensive ways to implement this. Since you seem so confident in how the Legacy Code works and how the servers handle stress. Please explain? I'm not sure what kind of legacy code in particular you're referring to in this case. Crimewatch was completely rewritten in 2012 and there are hardly any requirements for item management:
Using a (database backed) flag per item would be a total waste as the number of suspect items is tiny at any given time compared to all items combined. It's also temporary data that doesn't need to survive a server restart and thus doesn't need to go to persistent storage.
The key point is to store information about suspect items seperate from the actual items. There are many ways to do this and depends on the current implementation, e. g. as a list of { itemId, timestamp, originalOwnerId } in the parent item (container, hangar, etc). You only need to modify that data when something is added or removed from the parent item (timed out items can e.g. be removed through a periodic cleanup job; not really important how, as the timestamp determines if it's relevant or not). The only time when you need that data is when you change the location of an item. In 99.99999% of the cases this list will be empty, so it has no effect on performance where no suspect items are involved. If the list is not empty, lookups for Crimewatch are fast, computationally speaking, as the number of items is very limited and you only need to check the taken items' timestamps in that list and only until you reach the first one that causes an update to the new parent item's owner suspect flag timer.
Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
|
Brokk Witgenstein
Extreme Agony The Wraithguard.
426
|
Posted - 2016.07.21 03:41:57 -
[45] - Quote
That's what you get for asking a programmer to explain.
+1; I had another solution in mind but yours would work, yup. |
Nitshe Razvedka
985
|
Posted - 2016.07.21 03:47:32 -
[46] - Quote
and Pedro is a lawyer charging by the word.
Thieving pirates discuss INTEGRITY; Anarchist gankers give us LAWS; and Whoring merc's cry then blow off clients with INSULTS.
Up is down and down is up in the C&P Forum.
|
Specia1 K
State War Academy Caldari State
159
|
Posted - 2016.07.21 06:16:49 -
[47] - Quote
Or just make all those wrecks blue
(says the neutral pilot who has a Bustard...) |
Trevor Dalech
Absolute Obedience Resonance.
244
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 08:32:19 -
[48] - Quote
I see several possible counters to this looting tactic: 1) Gank the rookie ship before it loots 2) Gank the bustard 3) Bump the bustard away from the wreck 4) Shoot the wreck before it gets looted 5) Loot the wreck before someone else loots it
and last but not least...
6) Don't get ganked! (and if it was someone else who got ganked, why are you trying to deny the ganker their spoils? You meanie!)
In any case, someone is going through the effort of using two accounts in order to loot, this should result in some additional benefits. |
Specia1 K
State War Academy Caldari State
161
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 09:48:20 -
[49] - Quote
Trevor Dalech wrote: 2) Gank the bustard
Hmmm, good luck with that. A Bustard T2 Buffer fit for highsec gets about 275K EHP (with heat) and a passive tankability of 800+ DPS. An active one gets about double the Tankability
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 10:36:30 -
[50] - Quote
Specia1 K wrote:Trevor Dalech wrote: 2) Gank the bustard
Hmmm, good luck with that. A Bustard T2 Buffer fit for highsec gets about 275K EHP (with heat) and a passive tankability of 800+ DPS. An active one gets about double the Tankability Care to share the fit you are using? Because I suspect you are exaggerating a bit...unless you are only looking at tank vs catalysts and assuming nobody could ever use any other ship for ganking... |
|
Dom Arkaral
Addicted To Chaos Archetype.
526
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 11:36:32 -
[51] - Quote
Trevor Dalech wrote:I see several possible counters to this looting tactic: 1) Gank the rookie ship before it loots 2) Gank the bustard 3) Bump the bustard away from the wreck 4) Shoot the wreck before it gets looted 5) Loot the wreck before someone else loots it
and last but not least...
6) Don't get ganked! (and if it was someone else who got ganked, why are you trying to deny the ganker their spoils? You meanie!)
In any case, someone is going through the effort of using two accounts in order to loot, this should result in some additional benefits. but it's soooooo hard /s I mean there's litterally a trillion ways to avoid getting ganked... So if you get ganked, you defo deserved it
@op Whatever happens concerning this, AG will keep crying about how CODE. can still do *insert CODE. activity here* even after it got nerfed to shizzle. The only way AG can adapt is thro.. oh wait. AG can't adapt. They prefer sperging tears all over the forums so that CCP makes the game easier for them (in tthe hopes that they can stop failing one day)
Merc. Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester. #b4r
Gł+Montreal EVE Meet Organiser
Gł+Come talk in the ingame chan "EVE Montreal" for more info or just to chill!
|
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources Silent Infinity
223
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 17:13:29 -
[52] - Quote
Trevor Dalech wrote:I see several possible counters to this looting tactic: 1) Gank the rookie ship before it loots 2) Gank the bustard 3) Bump the bustard away from the wreck 4) Shoot the wreck before it gets looted 5) Loot the wreck before someone else loots it
and last but not least...
6) Don't get ganked! (and if it was someone else who got ganked, why are you trying to deny the ganker their spoils? You meanie!)
In any case, someone is going through the effort of using two accounts in order to loot, this should result in some additional benefits. By that logic suspect flags for looting could be entirely removed. I suggest you create a new threat in F&I because this thread isn't about it.
Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
|
Paranoid Loyd
9288
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 17:25:01 -
[53] - Quote
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Specia1 K wrote:Trevor Dalech wrote: 2) Gank the bustard
Hmmm, good luck with that. A Bustard T2 Buffer fit for highsec gets about 275K EHP (with heat) and a passive tankability of 800+ DPS. An active one gets about double the Tankability Care to share the fit you are using? Because I suspect you are exaggerating a bit...unless you are only looking at tank vs catalysts and assuming nobody could ever use any other ship for ganking... [Bustard, 285K] Damage Control II Reinforced Bulkheads II Reinforced Bulkheads II
Dread Guristas EM Ward Field Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
[empty high slot] [empty high slot]
Medium Core Defense Field Extender II Medium Core Defense Field Extender II
OH Stats: 285K EHP (369K vs Anitmatter 382K vs Void 211K vs Fusion) 90+ Resists across the board for shields 689.6 Passive recharge
Fix the Prospect! New Server Hardware!
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
273
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 17:31:24 -
[54] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Specia1 K wrote:Trevor Dalech wrote: 2) Gank the bustard
Hmmm, good luck with that. A Bustard T2 Buffer fit for highsec gets about 275K EHP (with heat) and a passive tankability of 800+ DPS. An active one gets about double the Tankability Care to share the fit you are using? Because I suspect you are exaggerating a bit...unless you are only looking at tank vs catalysts and assuming nobody could ever use any other ship for ganking... [Bustard, 285K] Damage Control II Reinforced Bulkheads II Reinforced Bulkheads II Dread Guristas EM Ward Field Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II [empty high slot] [empty high slot] Medium Core Defense Field Extender II Medium Core Defense Field Extender II OH Stats: 285K EHP (369K vs Anitmatter 382K vs Void) 90+ Resists across the board for shields 689.6 Passive recharge Even scarier when you put in some (pretty cheap) republic fleet large shield extenders and a fleet booster....
I stand corrected o7
edit: oh and the passive shield implants would add another not-insignificant bit... |
Paranoid Loyd
9288
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 17:39:50 -
[55] - Quote
You'll rarely see one like that in this situation though, at the very least it should have a MWD on it to get into warp faster and give you some sort of chance to get back to the gate if you get bumped. So realistically you're looking at 170K EHP.
Fix the Prospect! New Server Hardware!
|
Specia1 K
State War Academy Caldari State
162
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 21:11:49 -
[56] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:You'll rarely see one like that in this situation though, at the very least it should have a MWD on it to get into warp faster and give you some sort of chance to get back to the gate if you get bumped. So realistically you're looking at 170K EHP.
True. MMJD works on this class too.
Mastodon has a little less tank but better fitting options imho.
|
Kip Winger
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2016.07.23 15:47:02 -
[57] - Quote
Specia1 K wrote:Trevor Dalech wrote: 2) Gank the bustard
Hmmm, good luck with that. A Bustard T2 Buffer fit for highsec gets about 275K EHP (with heat) and a passive tankability of 800+ DPS. An active one gets about double the Tankability
Yes, and lets not forget that Concord is already on the grid since the the gank just happened right there. This is why gankers move concord from gates after a gank. |
Kip Winger
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2016.07.23 16:10:22 -
[58] - Quote
Dom Arkaral wrote:Trevor Dalech wrote:I see several possible counters to this looting tactic: 1) Gank the rookie ship before it loots 2) Gank the bustard 3) Bump the bustard away from the wreck 4) Shoot the wreck before it gets looted 5) Loot the wreck before someone else loots it
and last but not least...
6) Don't get ganked! (and if it was someone else who got ganked, why are you trying to deny the ganker their spoils? You meanie!)
In any case, someone is going through the effort of using two accounts in order to loot, this should result in some additional benefits. but it's soooooo hard /s I mean there's litterally a trillion ways to avoid getting ganked... So if you get ganked, you defo deserved it @op Whatever happens concerning this, AG will keep crying about how CODE. can still do *insert CODE. activity here* even after it got nerfed to shizzle. The only way AG can adapt is thro.. oh wait. AG can't adapt. They prefer sperging tears all over the forums so that CCP makes the game easier for them (in tthe hopes that they can stop failing one day)
You missed the point of the post friend. Its about not hiding behind a mechanic meant for something else. Not about ganking, not about removing looting from the game, its about fixing bugs/loopholes that have fallen though the cracks of game development. If you want to loot, you can loot, and then go suspect as the game was intended.
Posted: 100% Salt free guarantee.
|
NotTheSmartestCookie
New Order Logistics CODE.
139
|
Posted - 2016.07.23 16:54:56 -
[59] - Quote
This gameplay is a good example of emergent gameplay. The current mechanism fits the risk/reward for ganking and provides an opportunity for interesting gameplay as there is nothing to stop other parties from going for the loot too. If you want the loot and/or the killmails you will have to man up and put on your big-boy-britches.
Sadly enough the AntiGankers see player interaction as one of the least desirable aspects of EVE so their "solutions" always involve introducing more game mechanics and never involve undocking and pewing at other ships (unless it is whoring on concord kills).
Making New Eden a better place 8 rounds of Void at a time.
Funny, smartest, pretty and relevant. Pick 3.
Proud shareholder in Halaima MinerBumping
|
Kip Winger
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2016.07.23 17:35:37 -
[60] - Quote
NotTheSmartestCookie wrote:This gameplay is a good example of emergent gameplay. The current mechanism fits the risk/reward for ganking and provides an opportunity for interesting gameplay as there is nothing to stop other parties from going for the loot too. If you want the loot and/or the killmails you will have to man up and put on your big-boy-britches.
Sadly enough the AntiGankers see player interaction as one of the least desirable aspects of EVE so their "solutions" always involve introducing more game mechanics and never involve undocking and pewing at other ships (unless it is whoring on concord kills).
Please explain your comment. You said it "fits the risk/reward". Where is the the risk? a Noob ship that gets alphed? So that a Phat Bustard can quickly swoop in and fly away with Millions.. Billions of loot avoiding the suspect tag? Bustard getting ganked....? Risk? Not FY, concord on grid to prevent a gank... safely docks. So please.... tell me more about that.
I ask for a level playing field, and seems like gankers just want to keep a loophole that as allowed them to score billions... trillions of ISK in loot over the years, so I understand you want nothing to change, but it does not mean it it won't. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |