Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jonah Gravenstein
95
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 03:26:00 -
[31] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:You carebears are insane if you think we won't adapt to these changes and continue to make your lives living hell.
Au contraire, I for one am looking forward to it, some won't adapt on either side and will continue to cry in the forums, others meanwhile will have a ball kicking the shite out of each other for giggles
War hasn't been fought this badly since Olaf the Hairy, High Chief of all the Vikings, accidentally ordered 80,000 battle helmets with the horns on the inside. |
Grumpy Owly
567
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 03:54:00 -
[32] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:You carebears are insane if you think we won't adapt to these changes and continue to make your lives living hell.
You mean your finally deciding to follow your own advice of "adapt or die"? As opposed to whine and contend every point with childish answers and flawed arguments? How very noble of you.
Totally expect you to also since the changes won't specifically prevent the activity of suicide ganking. Just means you may have to manage security to potentially avoid certain implications of risk previously alien to you. And yet been given nice techniques to manage it also, but might actually require effort or shooting something with guns (owned by a player).
On the subject of Highsec aggression, I see a lot of removal of previous loopholes in the new war dec mechanics that if anything I hope will help to encourage aggression. And considering this activity will essentially make up the lions share of aggression in High sec I don't understand how the OP can conclude an encouragemet by CCP to make things more carebear. Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
319
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 04:05:00 -
[33] - Quote
I've been "following my own advice" for the past decade. The only reason I AM HONOURABLE FORUM WARRIOR is to let CCP know that there is indeed opposition to their tendency to soften the game.
That, and there would be nothing to adapt to if they decide to simply remove aggression in high-sec. At that point someone else can have my MMO dollars, because literally every other one out there has better PvE content. |
Grumpy Owly
567
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 04:12:00 -
[34] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:I've been "following my own advice" for the past decade. The only reason I AM HONOURABLE FORUM WARRIOR is to let CCP know that there is indeed opposition to their tendency to soften the game.
That, and there would be nothing to adapt to if they decide to simply remove aggression in high-sec. At that point someone else can have my MMO dollars, because literally every other one out there has better PvE content.
Bye then, I personally wont miss your lack of contribution to EvE by whining and wanting every ruling and mechanic to provide you the most control over the commodity of fun in EvE. So I don't see the commercial loss as that important when compared with the need to retain the sandbox for more than just a few selfish individuals. So if someone else can cater for your needs I'm happy for you to leave, average IQ might improve at the same time as a result.
I'll even open the door for you if you like, just remember to contract and send all your stuffs to me. Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
319
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 04:21:00 -
[35] - Quote
You need to make that slightly less obvious. Go ahead and edit the post. I'll wait. |
Grumpy Owly
568
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 04:27:00 -
[36] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:You need to make that slightly less obvious. Go ahead and edit the post. I'll wait.
lol, I held back if anything.
But just in case you are genuinely upset and can't take as much as you dish out:
Some alien concepts for you to consider for your future debating methodologies whilst sharing the sandbox with other players: "mutual consensus" and "compromise", it might help your arguments. Since the idea of sharing the sandbox with others means that you don't exclude others to the idea of fun and play in your reasoning. Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
319
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 04:48:00 -
[37] - Quote
That's the thing though, I like (liked?) EVE because its sandbox nature doesn't (didn't?) concern itself with consensus and compromise. When I started playing, the game was much more open-ended in terms of "player interaction," though perhaps limited in the amount of types of interaction available. Nowadays we have a lot more avenues for interaction as a result of additions to the game, but the experience itself has been sanitized. I bought product A, and throughout the years it has slowly changed into product B. And it's not like I can address this issue by finding another game, like the "carebear" population can; EVE has been essentially a unique product on the market. If this game changes so much that its nonconsensual PvP aspect disappears, I'll have very little reason to stick around because other games simply handle PvE better. This course of action would have nothing to do with sadness, and everything to do with logic.
I'm not a sociopath in real life; I don't go around robbing and killing people. I've never even committed a crime. I have nothing against consensus and compromise. I do have a problem with consensus and compromise being forced upon me when in the past it wasn't. (Also, how exactly having consensus and compromise forced upon you by the developers constitute a sandbox nature?)
I want EVE to remain EVE, and not become EVE 2.0. |
Grumpy Owly
568
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 05:00:00 -
[38] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:That's the thing though, I like (liked?) EVE because its sandbox nature doesn't (didn't?) concern itself with consensus and compromise. When I started playing, the game was much more open-ended in terms of "player interaction," though perhaps limited in the amount of types of interaction available. Nowadays we have a lot more avenues for interaction as a result of additions to the game, but the experience itself has been sanitized. I bought product A, and throughout the years it has slowly changed into product B. And it's not like I can address this issue by finding another game, like the "carebear" population can; EVE has been essentially a unique product on the market. If this game changes so much that its nonconsensual PvP aspect disappears, I'll have very little reason to stick around because other games simply handle PvE better. This course of action would have nothing to do with sadness, and everything to do with logic.
I'm not a sociopath in real life; I don't go around robbing and killing people. I've never even committed a crime. I have nothing against consensus and compromise. I do have a problem with consensus and compromise being forced upon me when in the past it wasn't. (Also, how exactly having consensus and compromise forced upon you by the developers constitute a sandbox nature?)
I want EVE to remain EVE, and not become EVE 2.0.
I understand this fear, but I've yet to see proposals that specifically prevent you form operating in the activity you want to do. Recent and proposed changes to readdress the balance that in essence has afforded a lack of the recognised EvE qualities such as risk to the ganker. The complancency they have at the moment to operate with little consequence and as such affords very profitable opportunities at the same time is the reason why it is being brought back in line with the EvE philosophy.
The arguments therefore being proposed by those in the activity seen to be only from their point of view and not accomodating others as a result. People can see the scare mongering as a result, yet when you look at it logically, ganking is not being stopped it is just making it more challenging, presumably as people have become more polific and competent with it as a a result. This however is the bone of contention I guess, in that you see your fun as being more important as it is your own.
And by your original argument above where the attempt to throw your toys out the pram because something didnt go in your favour is a classic sign that you are childish in the process about these arguments, whilst neglecting to see that others equally have something invested into EvE.
If you want the previous and ongoing arguments of "adapt or die", "HTFU" and "risk vs reward" etc. to be valid in EvE then you can't make yourself immune from that process can you? Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Caliph Muhammed
Short Bus Friends
106
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 05:15:00 -
[39] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:That's the thing though, I like (liked?) EVE because its sandbox nature doesn't (didn't?) concern itself with consensus and compromise. When I started playing, the game was much more open-ended in terms of "player interaction," though perhaps limited in the amount of types of interaction available. Nowadays we have a lot more avenues for interaction as a result of additions to the game, but the experience itself has been sanitized. I bought product A, and throughout the years it has slowly changed into product B. And it's not like I can address this issue by finding another game, like the "carebear" population can; EVE has been essentially a unique product on the market. If this game changes so much that its nonconsensual PvP aspect disappears, I'll have very little reason to stick around because other games simply handle PvE better. This course of action would have nothing to do with sadness, and everything to do with logic.
I'm not a sociopath in real life; I don't go around robbing and killing people. I've never even committed a crime. I have nothing against consensus and compromise. I do have a problem with consensus and compromise being forced upon me when in the past it wasn't. (Also, how exactly having consensus and compromise forced upon you by the developers constitute a sandbox nature?)
I want EVE to remain EVE, and not become EVE 2.0.
Never fear, in EVE we are the majority. And the devs are of us. These changes mean absolutely nothing to the Martyrdom Pilot. They go into battle with the outcome for self pre-determined. Perhaps a little more work will need to be put into maintaining decent sec status, but it should be as such. Without it, it's complete chaos and a little too easy to pull off. The new war declaration rules are excellent and in the hardcore EVE's favor. Train some social skills, avoid podding and do the occasional mission. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1390
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 05:20:00 -
[40] - Quote
Lana Torrin wrote:With the recent patch notes and the proposed changes to the criminal flagging and wardec mechanics I was wondering, why don't you just turn off highsec aggression already? Clearly it is no longer in CCPs interest to have people fighting in highsec without consent, so why not just take it away from us completely now and save us the 2 or 3 years of it getting slowly pushed aside. You'll probably only drop a few subscriptions now anyway as you have pretty much banned most of PL and Goons for RMTing ahead of their proposed jita camp.
Why draw out the death of highsec PvP CCP, just put a bullet between its eyes and never look back. +1 like for the original post |
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
94
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 05:30:00 -
[41] - Quote
Why are you all falling for the terrible troll. Come on guys, it's a 3/10 at best. |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
322
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 05:47:00 -
[42] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:I understand this fear, but I've yet to see proposals that specifically prevent you form operating in the activity you want to do. Recent and proposed changes to readdress the balance that in essence has afforded a lack of the recognised EvE qualities such as risk to the ganker. The complancency they have at the moment to operate with little consequence and as such affords very profitable opportunities at the same time is the reason why it is being brought back in line with the EvE philosophy.
The arguments therefore being proposed by those in the activity seen to be only from their point of view and not accomodating others as a result. People can see the scare mongering as a result, yet when you look at it logically, ganking is not being stopped it is just making it more challenging, presumably as people have become more polific and competent with it as a a result. This however is the bone of contention I guess, in that you see your fun as being more important as it is your own.
And by your original argument above where the attempt to throw your toys out the pram because something didnt go in your favour is a classic sign that you are childish in the process about these arguments, whilst neglecting to see that others equally have something invested into EvE.
If you want the previous and ongoing arguments of "adapt or die", "HTFU" and "risk vs reward" etc. to be valid in EvE then you can't make yourself immune from that process can you? "Adapt or die" only works when the option to adapt remains on the table. If high-sec aggression (the basis of the topic by the way) is removed entirely, then I'm not entirely sure what I'd be adapting to at that point.
What you see as much-needed balance changes, I see as a gradual but intentional decline that the game has been undergoing. I don't know how long you've been playing, but to put things in perspective, it was much easier to suicide-gank five years ago than it is today. Suicide-ganking was also much less common, because much fewer people did stupid stuff like haul stacks of officer gear in an untanked haulers on autopilot.
And therein lies the realization you must make: CCP has been paving over its sandbox not because this "balancing" has been terribly needed, but because newer players more and more choose to deal with in-game problems by appealing to the developers, instead of using the tools already provided for them.
Am I quitting EVE? No, I haven't said that I am, but I did say that I would if this game no longer keeps me entertained. Would I be obligated to continue doing something that no longer results in enjoyment?
I mean, you're kind of putting me in a position without a way out over here. I'm to be ridiculed if I quit, but at the same time I'm barred from defending my stake in the game by arguing in favor of maintaining the sandbox.
So let's say CCP removes high-sec aggression entirely. Now, I can't adapt because the ability to do so has been removed (you can't adapt to not being allowed to shoot someone by shooting them in a different manner). I can't quit because that would make me a hypocrite due to previous use of the "arguments" you quoted above. I also can't argue my case on the forums because doing so (apparently) would mean that I'm not willing to adapt in the first place.
What exactly am I supposed to do?
|
Just Alter
Bikini Bottom Surfer Talocan United
8
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 05:52:00 -
[43] - Quote
"I'm not entirely sure what I'd be adapting to at that point."
It seems like you're inherently incapable of adaptation :).
Worse than the worse helpless carebear really.
Maybe gow to low-null-wh and try some real pvp? |
Grumpy Owly
568
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 05:53:00 -
[44] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:I understand this fear, but I've yet to see proposals that specifically prevent you form operating in the activity you want to do. Recent and proposed changes to readdress the balance that in essence has afforded a lack of the recognised EvE qualities such as risk to the ganker. The complancency they have at the moment to operate with little consequence and as such affords very profitable opportunities at the same time is the reason why it is being brought back in line with the EvE philosophy.
The arguments therefore being proposed by those in the activity seen to be only from their point of view and not accomodating others as a result. People can see the scare mongering as a result, yet when you look at it logically, ganking is not being stopped it is just making it more challenging, presumably as people have become more polific and competent with it as a a result. This however is the bone of contention I guess, in that you see your fun as being more important as it is your own.
And by your original argument above where the attempt to throw your toys out the pram because something didnt go in your favour is a classic sign that you are childish in the process about these arguments, whilst neglecting to see that others equally have something invested into EvE.
If you want the previous and ongoing arguments of "adapt or die", "HTFU" and "risk vs reward" etc. to be valid in EvE then you can't make yourself immune from that process can you? "Adapt or die" only works when the option to adapt remains on the table. If high-sec aggression (the basis of the topic by the way) is removed entirely, then I'm not entirely sure what I'd be adapting to at that point. What you see as much-needed balance changes, I see as a gradual but intentional decline that the game has been undergoing. I don't know how long you've been playing, but to put things in perspective, it was much easier to suicide-gank five years ago than it is today. Suicide-ganking was also much less common, because much fewer people did stupid stuff like haul stacks of officer gear in an untanked haulers on autopilot. And therein lies the realization you must make: CCP has been paving over its sandbox not because this "balancing" has been terribly needed, but because newer players more and more choose to deal with in-game problems by appealing to the developers, instead of using the tools already provided for them. Am I quitting EVE? No, I haven't said that I am, but I did say that I would if this game no longer keeps me entertained. Would I be obligated to continue doing something that no longer results in enjoyment? I mean, you're kind of putting me in a position without a way out over here. I'm to be ridiculed if I quit, but at the same time I'm barred from defending my stake in the game by arguing in favor of maintaining the sandbox. So let's say CCP removes high-sec aggression entirely. Now, I can't adapt because the ability to do so has been removed (you can't adapt to not being allowed to shoot someone by shooting them in a different manner). I can't quit because that would make me a hypocrite due to previous use of the "arguments" you quoted above. I also can't argue my case on the forums because doing so (apparently) would mean that I'm not willing to adapt in the first place. What exactly am I supposed to do?
You can logically debate things without ultimatums if your capable of seeing things in anything other than black and white terms as I have been trying to explain.
Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
323
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 05:58:00 -
[45] - Quote
Caliph Muhammed wrote:Never fear, in EVE we are the majority. We're not the numerical majority, but we do hold the majority of player competence. However, that competence becomes irrelevant if it's rendered inapplicable due to game play changes. Like I said before, if CCP removes the ability to kill someone in high-sec when they don't want to be killed, there isn't anything that can be done to adapt to the situation. Such a change would kill the game though, which is why I'm fairly confident that I'll be able to maintain my steady rate of carebear unsubs come Inferno.
I think CCP realizes that allowing the weak to be culled is probably a better business strategy than having everyone quit out of boredom. |
Ch3244
Azule Dragoons Sspectre
9
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 05:59:00 -
[46] - Quote
Well looks like ill have to kill more carebears to make up for this. |
Grumpy Owly
568
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:04:00 -
[47] - Quote
For PvP and like to encourage more of it?
Want to validate a potential Career path in EvE with new income potential that is ideally designed as simply a transferance of ISK from one pilot to another?
Actually like situations where ships shoot back and "really" improve your KB resume?
You agree that pilots should adapt to challenging situations in EvE where acceptance of risk is an everyday seperator of those getting ahead on the curve?
Or simply want to make EvE less boring?
Support: Bounty Hunting for CSM7. Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
324
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:06:00 -
[48] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:You can logically and rationally debate things without ultimatums if your capable of seeing things in anything other than black and white terms as I have been trying to explain. Your posts haven't had to do with explanation as much as they had to do with personal attacks and troll-baiting. I mean, I went back and reread your posts, and I still can't find a single instance of you presenting an argument. Pretty much everything you said was about how I'm such a baddie. |
Dhorion Pyler
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:11:00 -
[49] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:For PvP and like to encourage more of it? Want to validate a potential Career path in EvE with new income potential that is ideally designed as simply a transferance of ISK from one pilot to another? Actually like situations where ships shoot back and "really" improve your KB resume? You agree that pilots should adapt to challenging situations in EvE where acceptance of risk is an everyday seperator of those getting ahead on the curve? Or simply want to make EvE less boring? Support: Bounty Hunting for CSM7.
EvE = Environment vs Environment
or
Did you mean EVE? |
Grumpy Owly
568
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:28:00 -
[50] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:You can logically and rationally debate things without ultimatums if your capable of seeing things in anything other than black and white terms as I have been trying to explain. Your posts haven't had to do with explanation as much as they had to do with personal attacks and troll-baiting. I mean, I went back and reread your posts, and I still can't find a single instance of you presenting an argument. Pretty much everything you said was about how I'm such a baddie.
Personally for me due to experience all I need to do is read the words Destiny Corrupted above the portrait, that is usually all the evidence I need. trollol
Anyone terribly interested, read Destiny's posts in "Crimewatch mechanics" or "Bombs and Bubbles in high sec" and determine for yourself.
Otherwise, I don't want to have to go all e-lawyer on your fail posts in the forums to make a point, or resurface numerous previous discussions covering the same topics over and over again, if anything for personal sanity since it is you I'm debating it with who consistantly shows little or no adaptation to discussion, I've literally better things to do than bash my head against a brick wall.
This persistance when you aren't offering any new arguments to the table as have been previously discussed is just a sign that despite discussion you have made a choice, fair enough your stance, why would I want to spend ages in detail debating with someone I know is unmutable? In this sense the only baddie behaviour is believing that repetition is a way to force your argument accross.
Sorry but I've made the point I want to make even if in generalised terms. Metrics and design considerations are being discussed with CCP and seems they agree with me in terms of future changes to mechanics that effect suicide ganking. Sure the game will continue to "evolve". Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
|
Grumpy Owly
568
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:34:00 -
[51] - Quote
Dhorion Pyler wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:For PvP and like to encourage more of it? Want to validate a potential Career path in EvE with new income potential that is ideally designed as simply a transferance of ISK from one pilot to another? Actually like situations where ships shoot back and "really" improve your KB resume? You agree that pilots should adapt to challenging situations in EvE where acceptance of risk is an everyday seperator of those getting ahead on the curve? Or simply want to make EvE less boring? Support: Bounty Hunting for CSM7. EvE = Environment vs Environment or Did you mean EVE?
It means Eggs Vs Eyebrows of course
Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
324
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:36:00 -
[52] - Quote
Ah yes, the good old "I have many very very valid points but I won't explain them because you're a troll" response, coming from a person who admitted to trolling in this thread no less.
Edit: Also loving the continued and unrelenting barrage of personal attacks against a person whose posts are apparently too "fail" to even be addressed in the first place.
Keep it going, chum. Maybe someone will actually buy into your "pro-pvp" arguments, at which point I imagine you will coil around them, unhinge your jaw, and swallow them whole like a serpent. |
Zircon Dasher
119
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:38:00 -
[53] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote: It means Eggs Vs Eyebrows of course
Looks at your face
Looks at your post
Looks at your face
Guess we know which one won |
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
159
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:39:00 -
[54] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote: It means Eggs Vs Eyebrows of course
no no, Ego Vs Ebriosity |
Grumpy Owly
568
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:41:00 -
[55] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote: It means Eggs Vs Eyebrows of course
Looks at your face Looks at your post Looks at your face Guess we know which one won
Glad that didnt escape anyone.
Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Grumpy Owly
568
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:43:00 -
[56] - Quote
Proof of an ability to adapt to Goon suggestion:
For PvP and like to encourage more of it?
Want to validate a potential Career path in GëívGëí with new income potential that is ideally designed as simply a transferance of ISK from one pilot to another?
Actually like situations where ships shoot back and "really" improve your KB resume?
You agree that pilots should adapt to challenging situations in GëívGëí where acceptance of risk is an everyday seperator of those getting ahead on the curve?
Or simply want to make GëívGëí less boring?
Support: Bounty Hunting for CSM7. Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Grumpy Owly
571
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:55:00 -
[57] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote: Keep it going, chum. Maybe someone will actually buy into your "pro-pvp" arguments, at which point I imagine you will coil around them, unhinge your jaw, and swallow them whole like a serpent.
Guess someone already has bought into the argument:
But I don't see bounty hunting as purley something of interest to myself, so they are not buying into "my" idea at all, collectively the CSM seems to support it also along with numerous support form posts and opinion in F&I and elsewehre. I'm merely promoting awareness.
But if you fail to see BH as something that doesn't promote PvP as an activity then there really is a "tutorial" you missed somewhere along the way perhaps? Bounty Hunting for CSM7
It's just criminal - Smuggling |
Dhorion Pyler
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 06:56:00 -
[58] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Proof of an ability to adapt to Goon suggestion:
For PvP and like to encourage more of it? Want to validate a potential Career path in GëívGëí with new income potential that is ideally designed as simply a transferance of ISK from one pilot to another? Actually like situations where ships shoot back and "really" improve your KB resume? You agree that pilots should adapt to challenging situations in GëívGëí where acceptance of risk is an everyday seperator of those getting ahead on the curve? Or simply want to make GëívGëí less boring? Support: Bounty Hunting for CSM7.
GëívGëí is acceptable clarification, thanks you for your cooperation.
Edit: Obviously I meant 'thank you' |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
324
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 08:17:00 -
[59] - Quote
I don't exactly understand how we went from discussing the removal of aggression in high-sec to bounty hunting and CSM, but whatever.
What I have an issue with is you continually putting words in my mouth by claiming I disagree with ideas and changes, such as the upcoming aggression changes in Inferno, and claiming my opposition to transferable kill rights and player bounty payments tied to destruction values, two things I proposed in early 2006 and have been supporting ever since.
It's fairly obvious that pretension is your game, and as such no real, civilized debate can be had with you. You're simply an aggrieved victim who deludes himself into thinking that new game mechanics that expose gankers to more sources of hostility will somehow make them concentrate on shooting each other and forget all about killing haulers and miners. |
Dyner
Midgard Protectorate
90
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 08:17:00 -
[60] - Quote
Rengerel en Distel wrote:Yeah, it's gonna suck when you actually lose your ship when you suicide gank. Next they'll make it so 1v1 duels don't allow people to have 5 neutral RRs on their side too!
Why would you waste time with 5 RRs, use 6 cheap DPS and eat the cost for the reward of lulz. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |