Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Shaemell Buttleson
Darwin With Attitude
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 05:18:00 -
[31]
I've said it before, I'm going to say it again now and every time in the future it's discussed.
Ice belts should only be in low-sec (or 0.0). The amount of PPL that rely on it as a product will force ppl into low-sec on a big scale.
If anyone says that solo POS owners will suffer I say either buy it or start working with other ppl or go and design a mining sim so you can play that solo.
All this wasted lowsec with hardly anyone in it will start being used more which is a problem the devs say they want to do something about and "isk sellers/macro miners" will have a harder time as well.
Signature removed, no profanity please - Jacques([email protected]) |
Ikasu
Gallente The Durandal Organization
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 05:22:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Dampfschlaghammer Edited by: Dampfschlaghammer on 17/03/2007 15:20:40
How about moving these icefields to low-sec and 0.0?
This would be a great thing to accomodate people who feared that new probing/bubbles/wcs-nerf might depopulate low-sec and 0.0!
I can't knowingfully agree to this. it might cut down on macro miners but, believe it or not, there are a lot of people who play the game to mine and have fun in high sec. Removing the ability to ice mine in high sec would kill the game for a few people I know. To be blunt, some people don't find low sec fun, and there are enough low sec only minerals as it is. While it wouldn't affect me directly, I'd hate to see a couple of my friends be forced to switch play styles.
|
Alekzander
Caldari Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 05:23:00 -
[33]
Um, ice mining isnt that bad when you get into mackinaws... I snag round 200 blocks a day out here in 0.0 (i use two and a hauler). Its more interesting having rats pounding on my hull lol. The thing is the less ice for the macroer's to sell, the higher the prices will go, thus making it proffitable for the non-macroer to mine it. The real market for ice is 0.0, not empire. If you want to make more isk, ship it as close to the chokepoints to 0.0 as you feel safe shipping it.
|
Hilabana
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 05:24:00 -
[34]
Take all the Ice Fields out of High sec there was never a need of ice in high sec at all ! if some one has a POS or needs fule let them mine it in low sec thats what there corp is for ! that will put a end to all this problem .. I never seen all this problems that we have now days back in 2004 .
|
Humpalot
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 05:31:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Humpalot on 18/03/2007 05:30:27
Originally by: James Duar I have a radical idea to deal with this problem: make mining ice not suck, and then remove all the high-sec belts.
What is not suck? Currently I'm thinking let's remove the fact it takes hours just to mine enough fuel to keep a POS up for even 1 day.
I say, let's consider how the real world fuel economy actually works - we need comparatively few suppliers selling a cheap fuel to make the whole thing work.
I say let's make it so ice miners pull in week's worth of POS fuel in a few hours, nerf down strontium yields to keep seige warfare at about the costs it's at now.
Let's make it so ice mining is a pure transport chain rather then a massive relocator of ISK into the pockets of macro'ers, so flying in and nuking an alliance's ice field usage is actually a serious hit because you then wipe out a massive source of fuel rather then a piddlng one.
Do it CCP. Give ice mining very high yields compared to POS fuel need. Will it wreck that market? Absolutely and it should! But then we restrict supply to low-sec and 0.0, and then all of a sudden protecting your ability to mine ice is pretty important since if someone knocks out your ability to exploit your fields then they cut off a HUGE portion of the supply even if you only technically need the fields for an hour or 2 a week to power many many systems worth of POS's.
Because *gasp* not everything need's to be a mindless painful grind and OH SNAP finally we'd have a set of targets which a small gang IS worth sending after and can make a huge difference by attacking.
Interesting but not sure it would help.
Macroers would just shift to regular ore in hi sec nerfing prices there.
That and the fuel prices would probably crash then sky rocket. Given the greater danger of mining Ice people who do it would likely just zip in to mine enough for their own use and zip out. Why stay in dangerous space when you only need a little bit that is worthless on the market? Just mine what you need and get out. Eventually there would be a shortage on the market and prices would rise till it was worthwhile to sell again and you are back where you started.
Also remember mining Ice is a lengthy process. Takes 6-10 minutes (depending on skills) to pull 1-4 units of Ice (depending on the ship used). Everytime a pirate group roams in to local and miners have to scatter to safespots/stations that entire cycle is ruined. So you increase inefficiency in mining even further thus putting upward pressure on prices again.
|
Humpalot
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 05:36:00 -
[36]
How about making Ice in 0.1 - 0.4 only? No 0.0 or hi sec Ice. Force Alliances to come back in towards Empire a bit and draw out hi sec there as well.
|
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 06:15:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Shaemell Buttleson
Ice belts should only be in low-sec (or 0.0). The amount of PPL that rely on it as a product will force ppl into low-sec on a big scale.
If anyone says that solo POS owners will suffer I say either buy it or start working with other ppl or go and design a mining sim so you can play that solo.
All this wasted lowsec with hardly anyone in it will start being used more which is a problem the devs say they want to do something about and "isk sellers/macro miners" will have a harder time as well.
Thank you, but this is a discussion about the accidential (or intentional) removal of ALL icefields from certain regions because these regions happen to only contain icefields in .8 or higher systems. Some regions will now have no icefields at all regardless of the security of the system. This is actually happening on Tues, whereas what you propose is *not* happening on Tues or likely ever.
The problem here is simple, CCP is punishing the wrong people. The macroer situation is purely an EULA enforcement issue, and sadly a lack thereof.
If someone was stealing your family's food, would it be smarter to:
a) Stop the thief (deny him access).
b) Starve your family and neighbors by removing all the the food from your neighborhood? (no food, so food cannot be stolen).
c) Move your family to another state where there is food in the hopes the thief will not go where you are now, only because it is more dangerous then your old neighborhood.
I hope CCP does sincerely keep an eye on this as Oveur stated, and that they seriously think more about how to punish the actual offenders and not the legitimate players.
|
James Duar
Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 06:49:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Humpalot Edited by: Humpalot on 18/03/2007 05:30:27
Originally by: James Duar My original post.
Interesting but not sure it would help.
Macroers would just shift to regular ore in hi sec nerfing prices there.
Prices are plenty shattered there already, but the diversity of the market in minerals at least allows that problem to be worked around - selling high ends and buying low ends etc. For ice this doesn't exist.
Originally by: Humpalot That and the fuel prices would probably crash then sky rocket. Given the greater danger of mining Ice people who do it would likely just zip in to mine enough for their own use and zip out. Why stay in dangerous space when you only need a little bit that is worthless on the market? Just mine what you need and get out. Eventually there would be a shortage on the market and prices would rise till it was worthwhile to sell again and you are back where you started.
This is exactly as intended. Ice fuel becomes expensive and worthwhile to put on the market in the long run, benefiting small producers who's major profits can then be found in selling to alliances and corporations who have lost access to their regular supplies.
Ice becomes a strategically profitable product, and easy to mine.
Originally by: Humpalot Also remember mining Ice is a lengthy process. Takes 6-10 minutes (depending on skills) to pull 1-4 units of Ice (depending on the ship used). Everytime a pirate group roams in to local and miners have to scatter to safespots/stations that entire cycle is ruined. So you increase inefficiency in mining even further thus putting upward pressure on prices again.
The idea is that people will mine their own ice, and prices will be high because of the disincentive to do it unless you need it - which in turn benefits those who do.
Otherwise nothing you have stated changes how low-sec/no-sec ice mining is right now.
|
Shaemell Buttleson
Darwin With Attitude
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 12:53:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Damon Ra
Originally by: Shaemell Buttleson
Ice belts should only be in low-sec (or 0.0). The amount of PPL that rely on it as a product will force ppl into low-sec on a big scale.
If anyone says that solo POS owners will suffer I say either buy it or start working with other ppl or go and design a mining sim so you can play that solo.
All this wasted lowsec with hardly anyone in it will start being used more which is a problem the devs say they want to do something about and "isk sellers/macro miners" will have a harder time as well.
Thank you, but this is a discussion about the accidential (or intentional) removal of ALL icefields from certain regions because these regions happen to only contain icefields in .8 or higher systems. Some regions will now have no icefields at all regardless of the security of the system. This is actually happening on Tues, whereas what you propose is *not* happening on Tues or likely ever.
The problem here is simple, CCP is punishing the wrong people. The macroer situation is purely an EULA enforcement issue, and sadly a lack thereof.
If someone was stealing your family's food, would it be smarter to:
a) Stop the thief (deny him access).
b) Starve your family and neighbors by removing all the the food from your neighborhood? (no food, so food cannot be stolen).
c) Move your family to another state where there is food in the hopes the thief will not go where you are now, only because it is more dangerous then your old neighborhood.
I hope CCP does sincerely keep an eye on this as Oveur stated, and that they seriously think more about how to punish the actual offenders and not the legitimate players.
D) Kill your family so they can't be stolen from or starve to death either.
Woot I can think of extreme examples to post as well!
Signature removed, no profanity please - Jacques([email protected]) |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 13:02:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Reiisha Why would you need to mine ice in high sec regions? You can't actually put POS in 0.8+, and for 0.5+ you need standings and certificates (or what was it), and then you can't even use all of it's functionality.
Having ice belts in 0.5+ is like having arkonor/mercoxit in 0.5+. It makes no sense...
1) research (mostly ME);
2) wrong the ice you find in high sec is like scordite or omber at most, little special ice product, little clatrates, the ice in low sec/0.0 is rich in those products.
High sec empire has a function and a life, so stop getting greedier and greedier and ask that anything that can generate isk is moved in the regions you (or other alliances) control.
|
|
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 15:15:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Shaemell Buttleson
D) Kill your family so they can't be stolen from or starve to death either.
Woot I can think of extreme examples to post as well!
As can I. My point is, that in regards to CCP's solution in combating macro'ers:
Bathwater + Baby ---> Window
|
Snake Doctor
Guardians of Hell's Gate Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 16:18:00 -
[42]
You guys aren't looking at the bigger picture here:
There will still be ice in high sec space.
As a side note--- Expect a mass exodus of shihuken on tuesday. Make note of your favorite farmer and just follow them to their new home. Continue griefing.
Your mom goes to college... |
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 16:43:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Snake Doctor You guys aren't looking at the bigger picture here:
There will still be ice in high sec space.
As a side note--- Expect a mass exodus of shihuken on tuesday. Make note of your favorite farmer and just follow them to their new home. Continue griefing.
Thank you but this is a discussion about certain regions having ALL icefields removed as a side effect of Tuesday's patch. Yes, there will be icefields in high sec systems in *some* regions, but that is not what is at issue here.
|
Snake Doctor
Guardians of Hell's Gate Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 17:08:00 -
[44]
the issue is that the .8 belts well be removed. .8 .8 .8 not all high sec....
Your mom goes to college... |
Lord WarATron
Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 17:27:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Lord WarATron on 18/03/2007 17:23:38 Perhaps the reason of only 0.8> is not because of tanking rats.
Sheesh people, they could just setup a afk maller to tank the rats, then warp in their miners. As long as the maller does not shoot, the rats will never change targets or respawn.
However, the increased delay of Concord in systems below 0.8 means that you can actually expect to suicide these macroers more easaly, since nowadays they are fitted with more tankability than the macroers of yesteryear --
In Internet Explorer, You keep tabs on your browser. In Soviet Russia, browser keeps tabs on you |
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 17:46:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Snake Doctor the issue is that the .8 belts well be removed. .8 .8 .8 not all high sec....
As it was I who started this thread it is not for you to tell me what this issue is about. You are completely off-point.
In some regions this change will remove *all* high sec icefields because there are none in these regions that exist now that are .7 or below. After Tuesday there will be *no* icefields at all in those regions, not in *any* systems. As I mentioned several posts ago, this will not happen everywhere, but in the regions where it does happen it will have a dramatic effect on all players and the economies within those affected regions.
My question to the Devs was if there would be "balance" by moving or creating one or more replacement icefields in lower security systems in those regions that would be completely stripped, so as not to upset the economies of these regions. The official Dev response was "they are watching this closely".
If you cannot appreciate why it is unbalanced to strip an entire region of all it's icefields I cannot explain this issue any more plainly, it would seem you are not involved in the ice/POS/fuel trade yourself and thus do not have a frame of reference. It does not matter to me one bit if CCP decides to remove all the icefields for example from every .6 system and above as long as *regions* that originally had one or more icefields in them to start with, still contain at least one icefield somewhere after the sweeping change of removing the rest.
|
Shaemell Buttleson
Darwin With Attitude
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 19:56:00 -
[47]
Ok fair enough the issue you have raised isn't anything to do with my views on ice and lowsec. I just wanted to say it again without starting a thread.
On the subject you have raised though I can say there are several things in eve that some regions have and others do not. The main one being 10/10 complexes or certainly some areas have alot more than others.
With that in mind do you think it is unreasonable that some regions may not have hi-sec ice fields when this happens with other things in EvE as well?
Signature removed, no profanity please - Jacques([email protected]) |
DarkMatter
Amarr Mineral Aquisition Group
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 20:10:00 -
[48]
Quote: Why would you need to mine ice in high sec regions?
Because players own & operate POS' in high sec, free from pirates in low sec...
Some of you are just idiotic in thinking removing all ICE from 0.5 and above is a good idea... That's the griefer in you talking.
Building the homestead
|
Kastar
Chronodynamics
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 20:40:00 -
[49]
Why can't I get rid of the feeling that this is one halfbaken solution again ? Do you see people remove roads because a few drive too fast ? No, the drivers are punished.
Every one and their dog can recognize a macro...it's not too hard to remove him from the game, no ?
I saw it in a sig somewhere above... back in the days devs dared take a decision instead of beating around the bush -----------------------------------------------
|
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 21:07:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Shaemell Buttleson Ok fair enough the issue you have raised isn't anything to do with my views on ice and lowsec. I just wanted to say it again without starting a thread.
On the subject you have raised though I can say there are several things in eve that some regions have and others do not. The main one being 10/10 complexes or certainly some areas have alot more than others.
With that in mind do you think it is unreasonable that some regions may not have hi-sec ice fields when this happens with other things in EvE as well?
I completely agree that players should only be able to do/get/obtain certain things in *some* regions and then only in certain security systems in EVE. Complexes are a perfect example of that. However, plexes haven't been removed, all of them are still where they have always been, and the same total number of complexes exist today, well, actually the number have been increased since Revelations.
The difference to me here is there are/were already vast exsisting player-owned infrastructures and relationships in place that depend on this specific resource (racial ice) being available in-region. None of this infrastructure would exist had there not been ice in that region in the first place.
Any legitimate affected player within these regions could probably care less if all the .8 and above fields are removed or as I mentioned before .6 and above would be fine, as long as they could still obtain the same racial-ice somewhere in-region. Removing a long-available resource completely from an entire region because of some macro'ers (or for whatever yet undisclosed reason) does not seem balanced or logical, thus my previous "thief" analogy. CCP's exact motivation here is crucial, because if these changes were to prevent macro'ers, great, but please don't make players suffer because of EULA violators, give us back at least 1 icefield and stick it in a .5 system since we had over 10 in the region to start with. If CCP's intention was in fact to meddle with the EVE economy via. the price of ice and ice mats, that just simply needs to be disclosed.
Ice mining and the related hauling/processing pretty much sucks already as has been posted many times in these forums. There are many grinding logistical issues I won't begin to go into. More sweeping changes like this could make it suck just enough more to discourage additional numbers of the few legitimate players still involved in the ice/POS/fuel industry from being involved any more.
|
|
Valeria Crossroads
Caldari Terra Incognita Confederation of Independent Corporations
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 22:54:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Valeria Crossroads on 18/03/2007 22:54:08 Removing those ice belts are for me the limit tbh. I started almost 2 years ago in Motsu, my beloved home. Since then cpp reaped the system and the surrounding systems with:
1) masses of mission runners which case lag so i move a few systems, 2) then ccp removed the ore belts, so i had to move again because all those miners moved to my systems. 3) made the route longer to Uotila - sankkasen systems row. Instead of only needed to move through lag systems Isenairos and uotila i now need to move to lagsystems komo, motsu, saila, isenaros and uotila.
The motsu/saila/etc lag pocket splits up citadel up in 2. I moved my mining activities to the right side of that pocket so i could still mine close to my production station. I mine ice too. I was very happy that my new ice mining system was finally lag free and 3 jumps close to my home base.
Till today when i read the patch notes. You guessed it right. All systems on my side are 8+, decimating the ice systems in my half and decimating half for the whole of the citadel region. The remaining ice system are lagged like uotila or are on highways to other regions. Shortest routes are now through Jita or through the lag systems.
And no, i will not move. Citadel is my home. I life here and will die here. Mining ice in another region is no option because i need to (remotely) handle my factories and sell orders.
Tbh i am sick and tired by the constantly reaping and destroying of my home(systems and region).
And that crap about hindering those macro miners. The same guys that were here are still here after 2 years. In sec systems ranging from 0.5 to 0.9. Sure now and then ccp removes them, but they are back the next day. That crap about macro miners having trouble in 0.5-0.7 is a myth.
|
Fork Boy
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 23:21:00 -
[52]
For my 2 ISK ...
I think things just need to be mixed up a little and randomised more in high sec.
Every so often in 0.5 to 0.9, a patrol of higher ranking NPCs (battlecruiser strength?) comes on through. Senior officers checking on their privates in frigates if you want some RP aspect to it.
Anyone at the keyboard makes the choice to stay and fight or leave, anyone playing AFK is toast.
The reason 0.4 and below is low sec is purely because concord doesn't defend you against players, not the strength of rats.
================================= A fork is a cold, shiny tool To pierce, tear and ingest. Whoever has the fork in hand Controls the meal of their choice. |
Sphynix
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 00:06:00 -
[53]
A Mackinaw has good shield resists.
Stick an Invunerability Field and it has very good resists
Stick a Small Shield Booster and with those resists - you have a decent tank.
Add the fact that when mining ice the only thing your 50m3 of mining drones can do is orbit you. Drones can't mine ice. 50m3 of drones is enough for 5 Medium drones.
Throw these facts together and you have a ship that can tank any spawn in 0.5 or higher and can kill it. (Even a Retriver can tank and kill 0.5 spawns with 5 light drones!)
So the only thing this patch is really going to do is make the macro miners richer - now they get bounties and loot :p The only "macro" folk this will hurt is those not in a T2 miner, without the decent resists multiple spawns would eventually kill them.
The only way to remove "macro miners" is to put them in a place where there is no CONCORD intervention, which is lowsec or 0.0. Anything else and it makes no difference to them as they already have the gear to defend against rats.
BTW if the shield booster was to much of a cap drain you can also just equip a small armour rep. All the skills to use the gear (aside from the ship) take about 1 day at most to train.
And as for the question - "are they going to seed other systems with the removed belts" - they seem to be removing them, not moving.
|
Arron S
Gallente Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 00:26:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Arron S on 19/03/2007 00:23:57 they should move all the ice belts to 0.4 and lower, BUT change the refining yields, on the isotopes, maybe 200-500 per unit of ice. or have hidden ice belts that have to be probed out.
|
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 00:34:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Damon Ra on 19/03/2007 00:32:17
Originally by: Arron S Edited by: Arron S on 19/03/2007 00:23:57 they should move all the ice belts to 0.4 and lower, BUT change the refining yields, on the isotopes, maybe 200-500 per unit of ice.
If all icefields were moved to low sec or .0 sec that would absolutely have to happen or you would not get a single ice miner out of empire. However moving icefields to low sec is not what this thread is about.
|
Valeria Crossroads
Caldari Terra Incognita Confederation of Independent Corporations
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 00:50:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Arron S Edited by: Arron S on 19/03/2007 00:23:57 they should move all the ice belts to 0.4 and lower, BUT change the refining yields, on the isotopes, maybe 200-500 per unit of ice. or have hidden ice belts that have to be probed out.
So we move all ice to low sec/0.0. What then, all isk farmers turn to ore. We move all ore to low sec/0.0. And then? Nothing to mine anymore in empire. And then? Killing spree under player miners? The day ice and/or ore is nerved to low sec/0.0 is the day i turn my accounts inactive. And no you cannot have my stuff. I choose to be a producer/miner because i could and because i hate blowing up stuff. The moment i cannot do that anymore i will be gone simple as that. And yes i like ice mining very much.
|
Retromash
Minmatar Order of the Lamp
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 01:16:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Damon Ra
yaddah, yaddah.
My question is: Will lower security systems (.5 to .7) that did not contain icefields prior to the patch, now contain new icefields after the patch?
yaddah, yaddah.
Originally by: Oveur
We're monitoring the situation. If we feel that taking Ice out of these few systems affects the bigger scheme of things we'll consider doing something. Note though, this will affect the prices to some extent, but that's mainly in the regions where there is a lot of Ice macroing going on.
You asked your question, Oveur gave you an answer to it. The rest of us chime in with our opinions, no matter how irrelevant you may think it is to the subject.
So, my 2 isk is that you'll probably find ice in a neighboring region not too far off from your personal stomping grounds, so you'll just be forced to go a few extra jumps. I don't think that'll make a "huge shortage" or cause "runaway prices" as a side effect, so I think you can chill, excuse the pun.
PMS - It's not just for THAT time of the month Menopause - It doesn't mean THAT time of the month goes away
|
Istaklain
Diamond Sword Industries
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 01:44:00 -
[58]
I don't get it.
This "fix" will not stop macro miners, they will just move to .5 systems. So why implement this fix if it doesnĘt actually fix anything? Is it just to make it look like your doing something?
Why not just ban the macro miners?
|
BluWine
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 02:37:00 -
[59]
Originally by: James Duar I have a radical idea to deal with this problem: make mining ice not suck, and then remove all the high-sec belts.
What is not suck? Currently I'm thinking let's remove the fact it takes hours just to mine enough fuel to keep a POS up for even 1 day.
I say, let's consider how the real world fuel economy actually works - we need comparatively few suppliers selling a cheap fuel to make the whole thing work.
I say let's make it so ice miners pull in week's worth of POS fuel in a few hours, nerf down strontium yields to keep seige warfare at about the costs it's at now.
Let's make it so ice mining is a pure transport chain rather then a massive relocator of ISK into the pockets of macro'ers, so flying in and nuking an alliance's ice field usage is actually a serious hit because you then wipe out a massive source of fuel rather then a piddlng one.
Do it CCP. Give ice mining very high yields compared to POS fuel need. Will it wreck that market? Absolutely and it should! But then we restrict supply to low-sec and 0.0, and then all of a sudden protecting your ability to mine ice is pretty important since if someone knocks out your ability to exploit your fields then they cut off a HUGE portion of the supply even if you only technically need the fields for an hour or 2 a week to power many many systems worth of POS's.
Because *gasp* not everything need's to be a mindless painful grind and OH SNAP finally we'd have a set of targets which a small gang IS worth sending after and can make a huge difference by attacking.
effing. Signed.
|
BluWine
|
Posted - 2007.03.19 02:40:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Alekzander Um, ice mining isnt that bad when you get into mackinaws... I snag round 200 blocks a day out here in 0.0 (i use two and a hauler). Its more interesting having rats pounding on my hull lol. The thing is the less ice for the macroer's to sell, the higher the prices will go, thus making it proffitable for the non-macroer to mine it. The real market for ice is 0.0, not empire. If you want to make more isk, ship it as close to the chokepoints to 0.0 as you feel safe shipping it.
Yes, because we should all have to have 3 accounts to enjoy EvE.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |