Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
165
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 11:38:00 -
[61] - Quote
Nope,i am natural german speaking player. And not really time for overreading this stuff.... And it is not so easy to write in english, if you have no practice.
There is no german speaking CSM, so i have to write down my thoughts here.
And sorry for my english i try to do my best. Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1514
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 11:54:00 -
[62] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote:Nope,i am natural german speaking player. And not really time for overreading this stuff.... And it is not so easy to write in english, if you have no practice.
There is no german speaking CSM, so i have to write down my thoughts here.
And sorry for my english i try to do my best.
It's fine. English isn't so easy for native speakers either. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
204
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 12:35:00 -
[63] - Quote
Hopefully I don't mangle the original post. English is a weird language compared to most. Some people on these forums aren't real friendly when a post is difficult to understand. :(
Quote:My corpmates and I discussed the possibility of a nerf of Tech 3 Ships. Most of them said, if Tech 3 ships get a significant nerf then they should also nerf the SkillPoint loss. Losing 4 days of training for losing a ship is what should be nerfed. Sorry.
And for the posted fit.... if I put enough ISK in a T2 Command ship I could also have a really perverse (over powered?) tank. So if you want to compare ships than use relatively equal ships. Correct? Example T2 Field Command Ship HAM Nighthawk with a T3 HAM TENGU both passive Tank. Both with AB + Tech 2 Fit.
My point is you get a nice PVP Nighthawk for about 260 mil without skills loss and a nice performance. 80k EHP and 590 DPS without drones with Faction HAMs
So why should I use a 500 Million isk ship with the chance I could lose a lvl 5 Skill? I only get 100k EHP and 600+ DPS
In the fact.. if someone sees you in a T3 you never get a fair fight ......
So that is my whole point.
greatings
Kira Hhallas
I agree completely with the Kira. Why use a more expensive ship when a cheaper ship can do the same thing and I won't lose skill points?? |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
165
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 12:43:00 -
[64] - Quote
thank you for overworking it. Its the same thing in the german forum. And well german and english speaking people have also different ways to explain things. But i hope, the others can understand my point of view.
Kira Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
776
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 13:02:00 -
[65] - Quote
I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! Putting work in since 2010. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
204
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 15:07:00 -
[66] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW!
That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship. |
Nix Anteris
Bite Me inc Bitten.
96
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 15:22:00 -
[67] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote: We all now, that Tech3 were designed for the role to be a flexible ship. But it think, this role was missed. Because only a few pilots change there fit. I lived long enought in W-Space and i can say no one changed the fit. Before you change it, the ship would die in an fireball. And its easyer to put multible ships in an Hangar, than change the fitting self. (And much faster to reship in PVP situations)
Exactly. We can't refit subsystems so we end up owning a new ship for every situation instead of the replacement subsystems.
The cost of ownership justifies the current power and current risk in my opinion.
If there will be a nerf.
1) Remove skill point punishment for losing a ship 2) Allow refitting at a POS |
Archdaimon
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
208
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 15:53:00 -
[68] - Quote
I always believed that a t3 should be weaker than a t2 for the specifick task that the t2 was build for, but however the ability and customization options to combine two tasks of two different t2 (but again customization comes at a price).
It could cloaky logi, or scanning dps or whatever. But somehow a t2 should be better for what it was build. Wormholes have the best accoustics. It's known. - Sing it for me - |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
776
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 15:57:00 -
[69] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship.
Why do you assume that the T3 would be better than T2 logi?
I'm thinking the T3 logi sub should have slightly less rep power as it does now but it should get a bonus to range to enable it to rep at around 20-25km (i.e. point range). Putting work in since 2010. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
204
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 16:04:00 -
[70] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship. Why do you assume that the T3 would be better than T2 logi? I'm thinking the T3 logi sub should have slightly less rep power as it does now but it should get a bonus to range to enable it to rep at around 20-25km (i.e. point range).
Cloaky T3 with Logi range? You don't see a problem with that? No, it doesn't need a range boost. It is fine as it is right now. |
|
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1514
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 16:17:00 -
[71] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW!
Think of the Etana man! You would totally ruin VoC's lottery business. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
776
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 16:40:00 -
[72] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship. Why do you assume that the T3 would be better than T2 logi? I'm thinking the T3 logi sub should have slightly less rep power as it does now but it should get a bonus to range to enable it to rep at around 20-25km (i.e. point range). Cloaky T3 with Logi range? You don't see a problem with that? No, it doesn't need a range boost. It is fine as it is right now.
Yep your right it's perfectly fine, it's not like it's a completely underused sub or anything Putting work in since 2010. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1514
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 16:45:00 -
[73] - Quote
Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship. Why do you assume that the T3 would be better than T2 logi? I'm thinking the T3 logi sub should have slightly less rep power as it does now but it should get a bonus to range to enable it to rep at around 20-25km (i.e. point range). Cloaky T3 with Logi range? You don't see a problem with that? No, it doesn't need a range boost. It is fine as it is right now.
Pretty sure 20-25km isn't "logi range" I agree it would be nice if it were slightly longer range than currently. Even just 15km allows for a small gang to move around a little while staying in range. |
ROSSLINDEN0
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
111
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 17:36:00 -
[74] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! Think of the Etana man! You would totally ruin VoC's lottery business.
Cant be having that now can we! btw check this out |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
206
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 21:37:00 -
[75] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Onomerous wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I really wish using T3s as logi ships was more viable but the limited range prevent that. Cloaky logi FTW! That would make T3 OP actually. The T3 shouldn't be better than T2 logi at being a logi ship. Why do you assume that the T3 would be better than T2 logi? I'm thinking the T3 logi sub should have slightly less rep power as it does now but it should get a bonus to range to enable it to rep at around 20-25km (i.e. point range). Cloaky T3 with Logi range? You don't see a problem with that? No, it doesn't need a range boost. It is fine as it is right now. Yep your right it's perfectly fine, it's not like it's a completely underused sub or anything
Well, tbh.. if you want logi then use logi.
You can use RR T3 ships if you really want . We use RR tengus to run sites from time to time. We have also done PVP where every ship had RR. Definitely not a problem. |
Sandslinger
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
91
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 22:31:00 -
[76] - Quote
Here is what I don't get.
At the present time 0,0 has more different doctrines going on then I have ever seen, truly there is Tier3 doctrine BS doctrine, talwars, T3 alpha. It really is a hop skotch of doctrines Which to me is CCP achieving a great balance already.
If T3 was so damn OP then you would ONLY see T3 used but you don't. Because they have balanced T3 in skill loss and in other drawbacks. The only ship that frankly isn't used much anymore are the Hacs. Which is kind of ironic seeing as they were all that was used for the longest time.
Anyhoo In wormholes you almost only see T3 used and for obvious reasons. they couple the kind of tank with superb DPS and tackling abilities that allow fleets to operate with effective logistics on the field.
With fights moving through wormholes you can forget about having effective sniper or range control fleets. So you need fleets that can withstand immense dps and be kept alive under guardians.
Remove this and what do you have in wormholes ? you have pure DPS fleets where whoever has enough peeps on field to alpha + more then the opposing side will win the fight every time. I'e true blob warfare.
In wormholes it has been showed time and time again that the side with the best ewar, best logistics and best tactics overall can go up versus a numerically superior enemy and win the day. This to me is what makes wormhole fights fun. It is tactics and not pure dps and numbers that wins, and this is only made possible by having ships that has both dps and such heavy tanks that they can withstand large amounts of dps without just falling apart.
And now CCP thinks that is OP and wants to remove it. which basically will just degenerate every wormhole fleet to uber dps fleet where numbers will win the day in every fight.
what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves.
|
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2138
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 23:04:00 -
[77] - Quote
Sandslinger wrote:Here is what I don't get.
At the present time 0,0 has more different doctrines going on then I have ever seen, truly there is Tier3 doctrine BS doctrine, talwars, T3 alpha. It really is a hop skotch of doctrines Which to me is CCP achieving a great balance already.
If T3 was so damn OP then you would ONLY see T3 used but you don't. Because they have balanced T3 in skill loss and in other drawbacks. The only ship that frankly isn't used much anymore are the Hacs. Which is kind of ironic seeing as they were all that was used for the longest time.
Anyhoo In wormholes you almost only see T3 used and for obvious reasons. they couple the kind of tank with superb DPS and tackling abilities that allow fleets to operate with effective logistics on the field.
With fights moving through wormholes you can forget about having effective sniper or range control fleets. So you need fleets that can withstand immense dps and be kept alive under guardians.
Remove this and what do you have in wormholes ? you have pure DPS fleets where whoever has enough peeps on field to alpha + more then the opposing side will win the fight every time. I'e true blob warfare.
In wormholes it has been showed time and time again that the side with the best ewar, best logistics and best tactics overall can go up versus a numerically superior enemy and win the day. This to me is what makes wormhole fights fun. It is tactics and not pure dps and numbers that wins, and this is only made possible by having ships that has both dps and such heavy tanks that they can withstand large amounts of dps without just falling apart.
And now CCP thinks that is OP and wants to remove it. which basically will just degenerate every wormhole fleet to uber dps fleet where numbers will win the day in every fight.
what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves. this is the best constructed post I have seen on the WH forum in months. youre spot on all points of the matter.
PS: Yes, in WHs everyone ends up using T3s. This is probably because T3s are made and designed specifically for and from WHs, makes sense they'd be good at WHs. Saying T3s are the best ship for WHs is kinda like saying Titans are the best ship for doomsdaying carriers with. Well, yes, and?
Quote:what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves. ^quoting this again in case anyone in CCP/CSM feel like addressing a real issue. |
chris elliot
EG CORP Mass Overload
212
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 23:11:00 -
[78] - Quote
Or it will force you to break your blobs into smaller units, since if you bring a blob of straight dps through I can sit back and alpha you back to highsec.
The reason nullsec is seeing so many shifts is twofold.
One is the power of the microjump drive on battleships. Since only a scram will prevent a warpout you either have to grab everybody at once or be forced to play ping pong games trying to grab one ship at a time while being shelled from range the entire time.
Second is the tierecide has buffed neut ranges on the geddons , ewar on the celestis which allows you to play two different types of alpha that will wreck a t3 fleet. The first is alpha cap/ewar. Enough range boosted geddons will zap the cap on anything nearby. And the celestises will ensure that unless your logistics stays in the danger zone they will never be able to lock further than the paint on their hulls. The second is a combination of the tracking bonus to the mega and the sentry bonus to the domis. The latter which allows for perfect alpha, since once the drones are assigned they follow the will of the FC at the speed of the FC, not individual knuckleheads trying to find targets on their poorly set up overviews. As for the tracking on the mega, since it is now prohibitively dangerous to stay in close with the exception of suicide goku fleets or doom portals, the buff to the tracking of the longest ranged weapon in the game makes it an obvious choice. There is still a very rock paper scissors meta here, until you start doing silly things with cap swarms and supers.
The availability of cynos and variable points of entry makes this work in nullsec so it seems all well and good. In wormholes however we only have the wormhole. Which makes every fight boring, since either you have to jump into me or me into you. Bringing all ranges to zero and concentrating everything into this little bitty sphere, where the do it all nature of the t3 makes it absurdly overpowered. Most of this is due to the nature of the terribleness of command ships and hacs in their current configurations, and the squishyness and inflexibility of recons. SInce the dangers to t3 fleets are removed by way of the limited mass of the wormhole they become overpowered because the only things that can beat them can't be used. Rendering them the one and only option out there. And that is both OP and boring at the same time.
|
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
408
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 00:17:00 -
[79] - Quote
DEATH TO TECH 3s.
Seriously, supers are easier to kill than a tech 3 blob. |
Casirio
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
480
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 00:27:00 -
[80] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:[quote=Sandslinger] Quote:what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves. ^quoting this again in case anyone in CCP/CSM feel like addressing a real issue.
but look at this corp desert pirates cartel. they have fewer numbers (44 man corp) and are able to use the tracking dreads and webs to fight outnumbered and come on top. Against us vs wspace and eventually overrun by VoC
I think this should be a legit counter for these guys who dont have the numbers like these bigger groups do to defend their hole and/or get some kills. |
|
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
155
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 01:19:00 -
[81] - Quote
Messoroz wrote:DEATH TO TECH 3s.
Seriously, supers are easier to kill than a tech 3 blob.
Geez enough of how much you love null already. Your like a broken record man. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2138
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 01:24:00 -
[82] - Quote
Casirio wrote:Jack Miton wrote:[quote=Sandslinger] Quote:what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves. ^quoting this again in case anyone in CCP/CSM feel like addressing a real issue. but look at this corp desert pirates cartel. they have fewer numbers (44 man corp) and are able to use the tracking dreads and webs to fight outnumbered and come on top. yeah... that's because it's over powered... you literally just proved my point, thanks. |
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
207
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 02:27:00 -
[83] - Quote
Quote:Or it will force you to break your blobs into smaller units, since if you bring a blob of straight dps through I can sit back and alpha you back to highsec.
Seen quite a few try that and it don't work quite like that.
Quote: The reason nullsec is seeing so many shifts is twofold.
Comparing null sex to WH doesn't really work well. See below:
Quote: One is the power of the microjump drive on battleships. Since only a scram will prevent a warpout you either have to grab everybody at once or be forced to play ping pong games trying to grab one ship at a time while being shelled from range the entire time.
Second is the tierecide has buffed neut ranges on the geddons , ewar on the celestis which allows you to play two different types of alpha that will wreck a t3 fleet. The first is alpha cap/ewar. Enough range boosted geddons will zap the cap on anything nearby. And the celestises will ensure that unless your logistics stays in the danger zone they will never be able to lock further than the paint on their hulls. The second is a combination of the tracking bonus to the mega and the sentry bonus to the domis. The latter which allows for perfect alpha, since once the drones are assigned they follow the will of the FC at the speed of the FC, not individual knuckleheads trying to find targets on their poorly set up overviews. As for the tracking on the mega, since it is now prohibitively dangerous to stay in close with the exception of suicide goku fleets or doom portals, the buff to the tracking of the longest ranged weapon in the game makes it an obvious choice. There is still a very rock paper scissors meta here, until you start doing silly things with cap swarms and supers.
The availability of cynos and variable points of entry makes this work in nullsec so it seems all well and good. In wormholes however we only have the wormhole. Which makes every fight boring, since either you have to jump into me or me into you. Bringing all ranges to zero and concentrating everything into this little bitty sphere, where the do it all nature of the t3 makes it absurdly overpowered. Most of this is due to the nature of the terribleness of command ships and hacs in their current configurations, and the squishyness and inflexibility of recons. SInce the dangers to t3 fleets are removed by way of the limited mass of the wormhole they become overpowered because the only things that can beat them can't be used. Rendering them the one and only option out there. And that is both OP and boring at the same time.
Any discussion of battleships in WH is bascially mute. WH mass limitations can really create issues. Is it possible that since BS mass doesn't work well with WH that T3 reigns for that reason? (that is a rhetorical question btw)
Seems pretty obvious your basic issue is blobs. Most often used definition for blob in EVE is "any fleet which is larger than ours".
|
Onomerous
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
207
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 02:29:00 -
[84] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Messoroz wrote:DEATH TO TECH 3s.
Seriously, supers are easier to kill than a tech 3 blob. Geez enough of how much you love null already. Your like a broken record man.
He's a broken record with blob... blob this... blob that... blob over there... blob over here... blobs of blobs. If he hates blobs so much, why go to null sex? If you hate blobs then NS is the last place you should go. |
Royal Jedi
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
98
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 02:48:00 -
[85] - Quote
Sandslinger wrote: At the present time 0,0 has more different doctrines going on then I have ever seen, truly there is Tier3 doctrine BS doctrine, talwars, T3 alpha. It really is a hop skotch of doctrines Which to me is CCP achieving a great balance already.
Id like to see some of this in Wspace too and before someone wades in with another post like:
Jack Miton wrote: PS: Yes, in WHs everyone ends up using T3s. This is probably because T3s are made and designed specifically for and from WHs, makes sense they'd be good at WHs. Saying T3s are the best ship for WHs is kinda like saying Titans are the best ship for doomsdaying carriers with. Well, yes, and?
Somewhat agree, but right now its pretty much the ONLY viable tactic in wspace, it shouldnt be T3 or GTFO. It would be nice to add a different dimension to wspace pvp. |
Casirio
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
480
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 03:00:00 -
[86] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Casirio wrote:Jack Miton wrote:[quote=Sandslinger] Quote:what is OP is Moros/Nag versus subcaps 3 classes under themselves. ^quoting this again in case anyone in CCP/CSM feel like addressing a real issue. but look at this corp desert pirates cartel. they have fewer numbers (44 man corp) and are able to use the tracking dreads and webs to fight outnumbered and come on top. yeah... that's because it's over powered... you literally just proved my point, thanks.
like i said i think its a valid counter and obviously a 25 man t3 fleet can still steam roll them over as you see on the km. |
Quinn Corvez
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
36
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 06:14:00 -
[87] - Quote
If/when T3's get nerfed and people start using navy BCs and command ships instead, I wonder how long it will be before idiots like Messoroz starts screaming for those ships to be nerfed... |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
167
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 06:19:00 -
[88] - Quote
Okay i stopped reading this thread befor i went to the cinema.
And i overflow all posts. So well yes a Tech3 25 man Fleet ca steam roll a 40 man fleet. And why ? I know some WH Corps and Ally. DIE NASU , RWR, AZTEC, TALOCAN, TLC; TL,.... So what have this Corps together,... yes !!!! i know it. They are highly trained Corps. They can play together and they know what they do.
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17635787
they are fast, and well organized.
So what i want to say. If you give 25 T3 to a well trained and hogh Organized group they will bring hell on the battlefield. Give it to a random group you wiill have 25 wracks in short time.
So every one oversee the fact, if you loss a Tech3 Ship you will loos a skill. Most time its a Lvl 5 Skill. Because Tech3 Ships on lvl4 are chreapy. Please do me a favour, if you compare ships , use your / normal skills sets, not every time "all lvl 5". And think about that you will pay 500- 600 milions for a fitted T2 Tengu.... so Tech3 ships have there price.
What i see is, this thread allready goes the same way like the "i hate afk cloaky in NullSec" thing.
So its 08:20 am morning i need coffee Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare -
Irren ist menschlich, doch im Irrtum zu verharren ist ein Zeichen von Dummheit. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2138
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 06:29:00 -
[89] - Quote
Royal Jedi wrote:Jack Miton wrote: PS: Yes, in WHs everyone ends up using T3s. This is probably because T3s are made and designed specifically for and from WHs, makes sense they'd be good at WHs. Saying T3s are the best ship for WHs is kinda like saying Titans are the best ship for doomsdaying carriers with. Well, yes, and?
Somewhat agree, but right now its pretty much the ONLY viable tactic in wspace, it shouldnt be T3 or GTFO. It would be nice to add a different dimension to wspace pvp. to use a somewhat ironic example... Aquila used to use a lot of nano fleet tactics to very good effect against many large WH groups and their T3s. they ended up joining in with the T3 blobs though unfortunately.
solo T3s can lose to BCs small scale T3s will lose to ewar even t3 blobs can lose to alpha fleets
there are other option, people dont use them very much though.
(dont get me wrong, t3s probably are the best pound for pound but you only need a little imagination to find alternatives if you want to.) |
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
259
|
Posted - 2013.07.12 09:04:00 -
[90] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:
Can someone explain to me why our representatives think cloaky T3's are OP?
In my opinion they're not. You can easily see if something is OP if the use of them extends past their intended role or if no other ship can fill the role. In the case of cloaky T3's their role is "booster", "scout", and heavy tackle.
In terms of scout or heavy tackle I don't see the T3's being over powered. They seem just right to me. In terms of booster they are prevalent but not the "only choice".
Quote: Also, i see very little activity from Chitsa and James on these forums. Does anyone know if either of these two have a list somewhere, of features/changes that they are trying to get CCP to implement?
who the **** are Chitsa and James? Surely they the only two eve online players worth listening to. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |