Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jas Dor
Republic University Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 04:48:00 -
[1] - Quote
While Null Sec complains about isk generated by incursions their alliances are being propped up by subsidies and gifts from CCP.
What is a subsidy? There are three forms of null sec: Sov, NPC and Wormhole. To the extent CCP points and says GÇ£there is the sandbox do with it as you willGÇ¥ there is no objection. When CCP picks a play style as the winner and provides it with monetary support, that is a problem. A subsidy can come in three types:
1. Time savings (increase isk/hour). 2. Special sources of passive income. 3. Ownable content not available elsewhere in the sandbox. 4. Direct gift from CCP.
Sov alliances receive the following subsidies from CCP.
1. A logistics subsidy (special time savings) in the form of jump bridges.
2. Special passive income in the form of supercapital construction arrays. No entity outside of sov space may build supercapitals. This represents a special industry opportunity and income stream.
3. Mana from heaven in the form of Moon Goo (direct gift). This includes control of extraregional moons resulting from sov alliance control of supercapital arrays and special sov only logistic solutions (Jump bridge, Titans to an extent).
4. Direct gift income in the form of a 25% reduction to POS fuel costs. While this originated in the days of POS based sov it has not been removed. With increasing fuel costs this has become a valuable resource and represents a direct ISK gift from CCP to sov holders.
5. Special content in the form of upgraded cosmic anomalies. (I'm actually somewhat torn on this as I think anomalies should be unnerfed to give 0.0 alliances a broad based isk making opportunity to build a community around, and that they are a fair recompense for paying sov costs).
One of the problems with these subsidies is that they have preserved alliances that would have fallen without special isk from CCP. To see null sec alliances insist that a community building feature (incursions) be removed from high sec and transformed into another sov holder handout is obscene. If this is going to be a sandbox CCP should remove the Sov fuel bill subsidy, take jump bridges out of the game, allows supercap construction in NPC 0.0 and transform moon goo into a (readily available) PI commodity. Once CCP stops propping up Sov alliances, then we can talk about incursions. |
Shad0wsFury
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
50
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 05:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
The real problem is not that 0.0 alliances are given any specific advantages to generate income, but the game mechanics behind generating that income is where the problem lies.
Alliance income should come in the form of holding space AND how often that space is "used". This was supposedly one of the driving theories behind CCP making the sov mechanic overhaul in Tyranis or whatever expansion it was. But it didn't work out that way.
Alliances should want to encourage traffic through their space, and pilots working that space by ratting or mining or doing industry somehow should provide the income to the alliances. If you can convince more people to come out to your space and stay there and DO STUFF, then alliances should be able to make a reasonable income off of this, through some yet unknown game mechanic. Suddenly sov holding alliances would have a reason to protect their space, because better protected space would encourage more people to come out to your area and make you money. Moon minerals can stay, but their profitability should be capped at 1-2b per moon per month after fuel costs, or possibly moon mining could become more interactive and requiring direct player interaction. Either way, it would be nice to see more of an effort to move moons and their resources somehow more into the hands of players, rather than alliances and corporations.
Currently supercap production is the only really good reason to take and hold sov. Upgrades for ratting and stuff are also kinda nice, but when you can make 200m per hour in highsec incursions, who cares about some crappy ihub upgrade that may not even spawn sanctums anymore.
Either way, I'm pretty sure that within the next year we're going to see a big overhaul of the sov system, and we're almost assuredly going to see some sort of moon goo change to fix the issues with tech moons. The CSM and CCP both seem pretty unhappy with the current mechanics, and they're a good 2+ years old now, so the flaws are very, very evident. |
Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
56
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 05:20:00 -
[3] - Quote
Shad0wsFury wrote:*snip*
Either way, I'm pretty sure that within the next year we're going to see a big overhaul of the sov system, and we're almost assuredly going to see some sort of moon goo change to fix the issues with tech moons. The CSM and CCP both seem pretty unhappy with the current mechanics, and they're a good 2+ years old now, so the flaws are very, very evident. As much as I agree on all your points.. history has taught us that it won't work that way.. Null sec is being iterated over and over.. and still, nothing. |
Jas Dor
Republic University Minmatar Republic
22
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 05:25:00 -
[4] - Quote
Shad0wsFury wrote: Currently supercap production is the only really good reason to take and hold sov. Upgrades for ratting and stuff are also kinda nice, but when you can make 200m per hour in highsec incursions, who cares about some crappy ihub upgrade that may not even spawn sanctums anymore.
The only way to make 200m/hour (of online time) in high sec is industrial production and maybe station trading. The highest number for incursions that I've heard is 120m which, honestly, I'm not sure is any better than the same faction fits could do chaining level 4s. Seems like the problems you folks in 0.0 have has a lot to do with folks not wanting to take crap from leadership, (or not wanting to give up a kill if they get caught out ratting) than anything else.
|
Sisohiv
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 05:40:00 -
[5] - Quote
Incursions are fine, Null sec is fine. High sec is fine, it is all based on outside intell.
EVE is built on a closed Universe and isn't played as such.
Kill API and EVE becomes a whole new beast. You can't just go to a website and find out where the current incursion is and be there to farm it. You can't lock people out of TS and Vent because they don't have up to date API authentications, The trouble with EVE is everything not related to EVE that makes knowing what everyone else doesn't know, easier.
When CCP bring API down, see how fast GD fills up with threads. API is a gateway no other MMO has to deal with. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1656
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 05:41:00 -
[6] - Quote
anybody who wants high-sec incursions removed is short-sighted and dumb
the issue isn't even the rewards, it's the fact that vanguards are so blitzable
anyway, away with you, faceless forum alt |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
609
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 06:16:00 -
[7] - Quote
Andski wrote:anybody who wants high-sec incursions removed is short-sighted and dumb
the issue isn't even the rewards, it's the fact that vanguards are so blitzable
anyway, away with you, faceless forum alt
Enough with the forum alt BS. There are very good reasons to use an alt if you arent goons. (And many don't even allow you to post with your main anyway)
Yet I have to agree. Blitzing gives shiny fleets a huge advantage over nonshiny fleets. Payout is fine but the site should be changed to force completion. And also changed so you have to gather whatever is needed in site and not hauled in by the logis.
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
881
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 06:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
So.... what subsidy category does "If someone shoots me their ship blows up within seconds" fall into?
Or would that be more of a "gift" from CCP? Revenge should not stop at the ship!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |
Jas Dor
Republic University Minmatar Republic
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 06:34:00 -
[9] - Quote
Andski wrote:anybody who wants high-sec incursions removed is short-sighted and dumb
the issue isn't even the rewards, it's the fact that vanguards are so blitzable
anyway, away with you, faceless forum alt
Hey my mains mug is ugly. Also this has been my forum alt likely longer than you've been playing the game. I'll post on the character people might actually know thank you very much.
Seems we have a miscommunication here. Incursion people acknowledge that vanguards are broken, have asked CCP to fix them, and have provided a number of suggestions to make all incursion sites more fun and challenging.
Then some pricks from 0.0 came in and said "no soup for you." The objection is to null sec people using their logistics and organization to deny high sec content to high sec players. If you're going to take actions that destroy high sec communities and justify it with "eve is a sandbox" then high sec players have every right to object to the special treatment that game mechanics give null entities. If EVE is a sandbox no group in the sandbox should have built in mechanical advantages.
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
881
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 06:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
Jas Dor wrote:Andski wrote:anybody who wants high-sec incursions removed is short-sighted and dumb
the issue isn't even the rewards, it's the fact that vanguards are so blitzable
anyway, away with you, faceless forum alt Hey my mains mug is ugly. Also this has been my forum alt likely longer than you've been playing the game. I'll post on the character people might actually know thank you very much. Seems we have a miscommunication here. Incursion people acknowledge that vanguards are broken, have asked CCP to fix them, and have provided a number of suggestions to make all incursion sites more fun and challenging. Then some pricks from 0.0 came in and said "no soup for you." The objection is to null sec people using their logistics and organization to deny high sec content to high sec players. If you're going to take actions that destroy high sec communities and justify it with "eve is a sandbox" then high sec players have every right to object to the special treatment that game mechanics give null entities. If EVE is a sandbox no group in the sandbox should have built in mechanical advantages.
How does balancing Incursions... or killing the Mom per present game mechanics.... destroy a high sec community?
What about the high sec communities that suffer the whole time you are prolonging the Incursion?
If there should be no mechanical advantages, does that mean you propose Concord be removed?
Or agents for that matter... Revenge should not stop at the ship!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |
|
Jas Dor
Republic University Minmatar Republic
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 06:43:00 -
[11] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:So.... what subsidy category does "If someone shoots me their ship blows up within seconds" fall into?
Or would that be more of a "gift" from CCP?
The same category as "if I jam out this guy who is about to suicide gank me concord will blow up my ship." High and low sec mechanics favor the prepared aggressor. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
881
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 06:45:00 -
[12] - Quote
More to the point, as we all know EVE is based on the concept of "Risk vs. Reward"... what risks have you taken to justify your reward and how does that relate to the risk of sinking billions into infrastructure and vulnerable static assets into lawless space to reap those perceived rewards? Revenge should not stop at the ship!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
881
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 06:47:00 -
[13] - Quote
Jas Dor wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:So.... what subsidy category does "If someone shoots me their ship blows up within seconds" fall into?
Or would that be more of a "gift" from CCP? The same category as "if I jam out this guy who is about to suicide gank me concord will blow up my ship." High and low sec mechanics favor the prepared aggressor.
Low and high sec mechanics have always favored the person being attacked. The only thing that slants the odds the other way is greed and laziness.
You'll have to try again I'm afraid. Revenge should not stop at the ship!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |
Jas Dor
Republic University Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 07:17:00 -
[14] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:
How does balancing Incursions... or killing the Mom per present game mechanics.... destroy a high sec community?
At present the only high sec group content comes from incursions. Destroying the Mom kills the content. CCP should probably look into adding more high sec community content.
Quote: What about the high sec communities that suffer the whole time you are prolonging the Incursion?
Who and how? I suppose if an incursion spawned on a high sec missioning hub that might mean a bit of delay as people move their ships to other agents. On the other hand that might be a great way to get mission runners into incursion.
Quote: If there should be no mechanical advantages, does that mean you propose Concord be removed?
Experience has shown that the only workable methods for security in EvE are NBSI and Concord. Any area where mechanics discourage NBSI but lack Concord protection becomes a wasteland (also known as low sec). If all of EvE became NBSI the accessibility of the game to new players would drop dramatically.
At one time concord operated as the faction police do now. The current Concord mechanics implemented after a group known as MoO set up a remote repping smartbomb trap on a major choke point (I think it was the MOTSU gate). The results of this action were judged so detrimental to the game that the current concordoken mechanics were added. Further, high sec security is a resources available to all players regardless of play style. Alliances subsidies are not.
Again I should point out that there are three areas where CCP has said "this is the sandbox, go do whatever you want" WH space, NPC 0.0 and Sov Space. Of these three sandbox areas only gets the equivalent of CCP magically creating 1/4 of their POS fuel.
Quote:Or agents for that matter...
You mean like the serpentis agents in Fountain? |
Othran
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
148
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 07:21:00 -
[15] - Quote
Jas Dor wrote: At one time concord operated as the faction police do now. The current Concord mechanics implemented after a group known as MoO set up a remote repping smartbomb trap on a major choke point (I think it was the MOTSU gate). The results of this action were judged so detrimental to the game that the current concordoken mechanics were added.
Every statement in this paragraph is bollox.
If you don't have any clue about the early days of Eve then you'd look less of a fool if you kept your mouth shut.
Oh wait, too late |
Jas Dor
Republic University Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 07:27:00 -
[16] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Jas Dor wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:So.... what subsidy category does "If someone shoots me their ship blows up within seconds" fall into?
Or would that be more of a "gift" from CCP? The same category as "if I jam out this guy who is about to suicide gank me concord will blow up my ship." High and low sec mechanics favor the prepared aggressor. Low and high sec mechanics have always favored the person being attacked. The only thing that slants the odds the other way is greed and laziness. You'll have to try again I'm afraid.
Should I send you the bill for the ships I've lost from pulling gate aggro/GCC for shooting at a non-agressed tackler/blackbird/rook/falcon? Gate shoots at all flashy's equally, no matter how you pulled that GCC (and won't do a thing to help you against someone who doesn't have a GCC). FCing low sec is it's own special kind of hell that I recommend you simply skip and head to syndicate if you're looking for small gang fun. |
Jas Dor
Republic University Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 07:37:00 -
[17] - Quote
Othran wrote:Jas Dor wrote: At one time concord operated as the faction police do now. The current Concord mechanics implemented after a group known as MoO set up a remote repping smartbomb trap on a major choke point (I think it was the MOTSU gate). The results of this action were judged so detrimental to the game that the current concordoken mechanics were added.
Every statement in this paragraph is bollox. If you don't have any clue about the early days of Eve then you'd look less of a fool if you kept your mouth shut. Oh wait, too late
http://eve-history.net/wiki/index.php/M0o_Corp I've always heard the story that the straw that broke the camels back, and resulted in the bans, were the remote repping disco ships tanking Concord (which also resulted in the anything that leads Concord to not kill you is an exploit rule). If this is not the case could you update the history wiki? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
2654
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 07:43:00 -
[18] - Quote
Jas Dor wrote:While Null Sec complains about isk generated by incursions their alliances are being propped up by subsidies and gifts from CCP.
What is a subsidy? There are three forms of null sec: Sov, NPC and Wormhole. To the extent CCP points and says GÇ£there is the sandbox do with it as you willGÇ¥ there is no objection. When CCP picks a play style as the winner and provides it with monetary support, that is a problem. A subsidy can come in three types:
1. Time savings (increase isk/hour). 2. Special sources of passive income. 3. Ownable content not available elsewhere in the sandbox. 4. Direct gift from CCP.
Sov alliances receive the following subsidies from CCP.
1. A logistics subsidy (special time savings) in the form of jump bridges.
2. Special passive income in the form of supercapital construction arrays. No entity outside of sov space may build supercapitals. This represents a special industry opportunity and income stream.
3. Mana from heaven in the form of Moon Goo (direct gift). This includes control of extraregional moons resulting from sov alliance control of supercapital arrays and special sov only logistic solutions (Jump bridge, Titans to an extent).
4. Direct gift income in the form of a 25% reduction to POS fuel costs. While this originated in the days of POS based sov it has not been removed. With increasing fuel costs this has become a valuable resource and represents a direct ISK gift from CCP to sov holders.
5. Special content in the form of upgraded cosmic anomalies. (I'm actually somewhat torn on this as I think anomalies should be unnerfed to give 0.0 alliances a broad based isk making opportunity to build a community around, and that they are a fair recompense for paying sov costs).
One of the problems with these subsidies is that they have preserved alliances that would have fallen without special isk from CCP. To see null sec alliances insist that a community building feature (incursions) be removed from high sec and transformed into another sov holder handout is obscene. If this is going to be a sandbox CCP should remove the Sov fuel bill subsidy, take jump bridges out of the game, allows supercap construction in NPC 0.0 and transform moon goo into a (readily available) PI commodity. Once CCP stops propping up Sov alliances, then we can talk about incursions.
If being in sov 0.0 is so superawesome, and has so few drawbacks, why are not you operating there? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Othran
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
148
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 07:53:00 -
[19] - Quote
Jas Dor wrote:Othran wrote:Jas Dor wrote: At one time concord operated as the faction police do now. The current Concord mechanics implemented after a group known as MoO set up a remote repping smartbomb trap on a major choke point (I think it was the MOTSU gate). The results of this action were judged so detrimental to the game that the current concordoken mechanics were added.
Every statement in this paragraph is bollox. If you don't have any clue about the early days of Eve then you'd look less of a fool if you kept your mouth shut. Oh wait, too late http://eve-history.net/wiki/index.php/M0o_Corp I've always heard the story that the straw that broke the camels back, and resulted in the bans, were the remote repping disco ships tanking Concord (which also resulted in the anything that leads Concord to not kill you is an exploit rule). If this is not the case could you update the history wiki?
The wiki was written by someone who had no idea what happened in Summer 2003. If someone who was in m0o wants to update it then they can - I have no interest in correcting CCP's wiki.
For example :
1) they were gatecamping Mara-Passari which is low-sec, so no concord even if it did exist;
2) there were no BSs when they started that camp, so no disco;
3) nobody got banned;
My point is that you're making crap up to suit your rant. You'd look less of a fool if you didn't. |
Umega
Solis Mensa
58
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 08:06:00 -
[20] - Quote
Jas Dor wrote:Again I should point out that there are three areas where CCP has said "this is the sandbox, go do whatever you want" WH space, NPC 0.0 and Sov Space. Of these three sandbox areas only gets the equivalent of CCP magically creating 1/4 of their POS fuel.
Please link this supposed comment of CCP saying and confirming that.
I'm pretty sure there are not 3 seperate sandboxes.
I'm pretty damn sure that there is just ONE sandbox and all those areas, including high/low.. are in it.
The fact that CONCORD takes time to show up and not insta-powns.. or that there isn't some outright mechanic that disables highsec ganking should clue you on CCP intentions for this game.. and what people are allowed to do to others in the lone sandbox.
You think majority of people go to null for wealth? No. Fights.. Yes.
And some aren't interested in the wealth aspect, more so to hold Power. They get the wealth is merely a tool to Power, wealth is a figment, pixels, meaningless.. but an important tool to weild Power in null, as it should be.. especially in such economic driven game.
The problems is that people still need Isk. For one thing or another.. alliances reimbursement programs, while some steller, some are not.. and none cover EVERYTHING. They never could.. cause there really isn't enough isk in null to do so, period.. ever. Believe otherwise if you want, trust me.. you're wrong. Takes one good shoot to the warchest to turn a fear into an outright panic.
If more is done to nerf the wealth of null.. the current problem is only going to get worse. Less people SPENDING TIME in null.. spending time on high toons to generate Isk. Which means less people overall around to pew-pew each other on roams and such. Stagnant.
The whole arguement that high is so much more populated than the rest of EVE is such a bullshit number. Why? Because it is very likely that null/low characters have highsec alts for a variety of different reasons that suit their personal needs and ambitions in this game.. THAT IS HOW POWERFUL HIGHSEC IS. Where as there are highsec onlys that do not have null alts.
The Incursion situation is driving this even further and further. More people spending less time in null and more time in highsec..
Which then becomes greatly compounded by the fact of raising PLEX in both cost, in how much is traded at a median level. An amount of which both are increasing.. because supply is either stationary, or even going down.. where as demand is obviously going up. Do I need to explain what caused this result?
Incursions. Faction BS n faction fit all over the place.
T3 cruisers out the ass all over the place and everywhere. No amount of buffs and changes to AFs, eafs, bc, T1 cruisers is going to change a damn thing about sigments of the population so easily floating about in T3 cruisers and faction ships.. unless the ships end up better than those, and lets hope it doesn't jump that shark.
When you start to have so much income.. you start to indulge.. indy alt here, scout/fleet boosting alt here.. fancy ships here n there. PLEX for all..
Guess what.. to keep that lifestyle, got to spend more time making isk, keep making isk, keep making isk..
Less time players spent in null alts. Less drive n desire for newbs to leave the safer riches of high.
THAT IS THE PROBLEM.
And no.. making null balanced and equal with isk flow, moon goo and such everywhere is a terrible idea. That will truly create mini-pockets of 'highsec' with alliances having no desire to risk lose over more, when everything is the same next door. There should be a strong section, and only the strongest and most Stable.. should control it.
Equality for all can kiss my ass. Earn your keep.
|
|
Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
545
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 08:24:00 -
[21] - Quote
I go to nullsec to get fights. I go to hisec to manufacture almost anything short of caps, because it's a fucktonne less of a cockstab to manufacture things in hisec than in nullsec, regardless of these "subsidies" you speak of. |
Valei Khurelem
207
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 08:24:00 -
[22] - Quote
As long as combat or traveling is imbalanced and not based on player skill and decisions these problems will continue to exist, I can fly to 0.0 space pretty safely in a shuttle or pod, something quick, but anything useful? Hell no, there are too many chokepoints when you go anywhere useful that are guarded by people with expensive ships looking for easy kills because they can't kill anyone else anymore.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
56
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 08:30:00 -
[23] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:As long as combat or traveling is imbalanced and not based on player skill and decisions these problems will continue to exist, I can fly to 0.0 space pretty safely in a shuttle or pod, something quick, but anything useful? Hell no, there are too many chokepoints when you go anywhere useful that are guarded by people with expensive ships looking for easy kills because they can't kill anyone else anymore. You're talking about a life besides the blob here, right?
+1 |
AnkaD
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 08:35:00 -
[24] - Quote
Jas Dor wrote: Seems like the problems you folks in 0.0 have has a lot to do with folks not wanting to take crap from leadership,
Can someone please explain me where this myth originates from? I keep reading it a lot yet I never experienced it. Hiseccers seem to think we are somewhat betrayed by our leadership who only play this game to RMT their rent or whatever. Well I don't feel this waybut probably I'm just a braindead zombie not realizing the "real" world. |
Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
545
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 08:57:00 -
[25] - Quote
Jas Dor wrote:Seems like the problems you folks in 0.0 have has a lot to do with folks not wanting to take crap from leadership Seems like you hisec people have a warped impression of what people do in nullsec. vOv |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate
525
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 09:00:00 -
[26] - Quote
Yea Dominion was't such a good thing... |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
2658
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:02:00 -
[27] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:As long as combat or traveling is imbalanced and not based on player skill and decisions these problems will continue to exist, I can fly to 0.0 space pretty safely in a shuttle or pod, something quick, but anything useful? Hell no, there are too many chokepoints when you go anywhere useful that are guarded by people with expensive ships looking for easy kills because they can't kill anyone else anymore.
Travelling (by which I assume you mean "arriving with ship and cargo intact" is indeed almost entirely player skillbased. This is readily apparent from how unbelievably bad so many people are at it. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
241
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:07:00 -
[28] - Quote
Null sec needs *something* to fight over. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |