Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Aeleva
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 19:23:00 -
[31]
Concord could possibly due with an upgrade due to more and more TII ships making tanking easier. However suicide smartbomb ships will screw you in empire even though concord would *****the offender.
|
Marcin Siwczuk
|
Posted - 2006.05.17 12:47:00 -
[32]
IMO there are MANY flaws in current concord system...
I understand why concord bashes you if you hit someone in secure space - that's needed... Why it bashes you if you hit a gang member? I also understand.
Why concord does not bash you if you shoot corp member I also understand...
But... why the hell concord shoots you if you accidentialy hit gang member who set +10 standing to you??
Isn't +10 enough as "I know him and I trust him" ?
As well... someone steals ore repatedly and guess what... concord doesn't care...
Maybe some time for improvements in concord logic? not only making them stronger, faster and spawning wherever/whenever?
|
G Dabak
|
Posted - 2006.05.17 13:36:00 -
[33]
I am honestly sorry that you had to learn this lesson the hard way.
However, I have to give CCP a lot of credit for not *****ing down on a legitimate exploitation (in the general sense) of game mechanics just because of an angry vocal minority.
|
Prestis
|
Posted - 2006.05.17 18:47:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Aeleva Concord could possibly due with an upgrade due to more and more TII ships making tanking easier. However suicide smartbomb ships will screw you in empire even though concord would *****the offender.
Concord do around 4000 DPS. No-one tanks them.
A heavily tanked-out BS might last 6-8 seconds to get a second volley off, but most high-sec pirates have to plan to one-shot any target, which basically means T1 Indys and frigates only.
Concord can't really be beefed up in any meaningful way, unless you plan to give them physic powers to predict who is going to open fire.
|
Selena 001
|
Posted - 2006.05.17 21:06:00 -
[35]
My advice would be "fit 2 medium sheild extenders". Since the changes to them, you can obost your sheild to a few K, which should allow you to survive an attack long enuff to warp out or until they get killed by concord. ___________
Dont mind me, I'm Forum-Whoring cause I dont have anything better to do with my life... |
Yazoul Samaiel
|
Posted - 2006.05.17 21:21:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Sfynx You are not invulnerable in a high security system. A suicide ganker got you because you were transporting your life savings in a tech 1 hauler made of paper. Ever considered using a transport ship (tech 2 hauler) which have much better resistances so concord has some time to finish the job? That's what they are there for, receiving some beating to keep your cargo safe.
I got ganked in the blockade gallante runner b4 by a T2 geddon and lost loads of T2 stuff on it and it was in 0.6 system coz i was afk hauling Using cans prob helps so at least if u lose ur ship u can collect ur cans later with a password ofc. "What ever that doesn't Kill me just makes me stronger"
|
Michele Thanatosis
|
Posted - 2006.05.17 22:58:00 -
[37]
Adding cargo scanning to the list of hostile acts in .5 and greater space would go along way to reducing throw away ganking in high sec space. There really is no reason to scan in High sec space unless your gonna gank anyways.
|
Mordrake
|
Posted - 2006.05.17 23:04:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Helison Yeah, insurement payment for losses to concord should be canceled as soon as possible. This will help already a bit towards this problem.
Definatly a good start.... another good way to go would be to get flagged and concorded for using a cargo scanner in High sec.
In my opinion these players are scum.... if you want to be a pirate go try to gank haulers in 0.0 and have some balls. CNR Command Pilot - Commonwelth of Ekliptika
"Arte et Marte" |
Zarch AlDain
|
Posted - 2006.05.18 08:57:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Yazoul Samaiel
Originally by: Sfynx You are not invulnerable in a high security system. A suicide ganker got you because you were transporting your life savings in a tech 1 hauler made of paper. Ever considered using a transport ship (tech 2 hauler) which have much better resistances so concord has some time to finish the job? That's what they are there for, receiving some beating to keep your cargo safe.
Doesnt work because they can just grab your cans and go repackage them from what I hear (never tried it).
What will work though is quickly anchoring the cans when you get attacked...if you have time to do so!
I got ganked in the blockade gallante runner b4 by a T2 geddon and lost loads of T2 stuff on it and it was in 0.6 system coz i was afk hauling Using cans prob helps so at least if u lose ur ship u can collect ur cans later with a password ofc.
-- Zarch AlDain The Blackwater Brigade Huzzah Federation
|
Andreask14
|
Posted - 2006.05.18 11:42:00 -
[40]
The obvious solution would be to leave empire and play in the much safer 0.0 space.
There are no pirates in 0.0. ________________________________________________
Just a quick reminder that "Local" and "Instas" will always be what they are. |
|
csebal
|
Posted - 2006.05.18 15:26:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Andreask14 The obvious solution would be to leave empire and play in the much safer 0.0 space.
There are no pirates in 0.0.
Sooo true. I've lived in 0.0 for years and never been victim of gate gankers there. Then i decided to move back to empire and do some level4 missions, and within a few hours i was killed by pirates.
I'm afraid 0.0 - even warzones like tribute or the north generally - are much safer if you are flying anything of value.
Why? Because in 0.0 you have a clear picture on who your friends / enemies are. In empire its just a big free for all.
In my opinion EVE has been castrated over and over again to please the 'good', the 'righteous', the 'peaceful' or simply the 'carebear' side. Maybe the best thing that could happen to it would be to make all systems 0.0 except for a few ones that are no-pvp zones. (newbie systems basically)
Keep the sec status, but remove concord. Have sec status of a system slowly increase if there is no 'crime' happening there and have sec status decrease if it is a crime center.
Define crime to be any kind of agression not sanctioned by a war declaration.
This way the security status would show a true picture on the security of a system not just some arbitrary number that only gives players a false sense of safety.
This would do it for a start. My post does not represent the general or official opinion of anyone else besides me. No matter what YOU believe. |
SUPER J0SH
|
Posted - 2006.05.18 18:07:00 -
[42]
The appears to have been no exploit in that chain of events. Concord did destroy the ship of the person who killed you. They were willing to sacrifice a ship in order to ensure your cargo became a loot can.
They obviously scanned you, and saw something valuable.
Your defence against such an attack are various, within the current game mechanics. 1. Place valuable items in cans so they are not as easily detected upon scanning.
cans are scanned straight thru.
2. Fly using instajumps so your time at gates is limited.
IMHO (though ignored) insta are borderline exploit and I refuse to use them.
3. Don't use a heavy easily shot, fast locked, low agility weak vessel to transport. (People don't move diamonds and gold in furniture removal vans)
tend to agree with this....
4. Don't overload your transport ship with modules to make it weaker and slower, use energy fields for protection and make more trips.
agreed
5. Hire a team to escort you.
to what point, they can't shoot first, they can do nothing to defend you in safe space, with the possible exception of a shield/armor boost squad...
6. Trail with an alt of your own so you can loot your own can should this situation arise.
Wouldn't the can be flagged as property of the killer.... presumably they have gangmates close by....
7. Use the courier service and have someone else do the valuable hauling for you.
viable, though not many people take couriers with high collateral.
There are other ways to avoid this. However, your suggestion that this is a change in game mechanics is unwarrented. There has always been the presence of suicide vessels, people willing to trade their ships for a shot at killing someone before concord kills them. Think of it as assassination, it exists, the police respond, bu often not in time.
Personally I think scanning should be made aggressive.
|
BaJaiah
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 13:53:00 -
[43]
Edited by: BaJaiah on 19/05/2006 13:54:21 The only problem I see here is that theres no defence vs passive targeting and scanning. Either remove passive targeting or make us some scan-jammers to provide information security.
Remove passive targeting = you'd be warned that somebody is actually interrested in what you are carrying/how you ship is fitted (not many other reasons to target neutral ships in high-sec)
Scan-jammers = my favorite - if you want to keep others in the dark about what you are hauling fit a (bunch of) scan-jammer(s). Could work much like the current EW or scramble/stab system. Scan-jammers should at least have passive module varriants so you needn't keep activating them for each jump. Hell the smugler proffesion might even actually become a reallity if you throw a couple of different modules and skills into this and apply the rules to NPC's as well
|
Nina686
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 14:49:00 -
[44]
to the person on the first page who pointed out that the cans don't improve security. They do because the scanner just sees a can rather than a bunch of bpo's. Therefor he may not attack. Scanning shouldn't be made into a criminal act... thats dumb... its scanning for christ sake. get over it. A mod that attempts to foil anyone scanning you would make plenty of sense though. This isn't an exploit and nowhere in eve is safe... its just 'high' security as opposed to 'low' security. You can't just load up bpo's etc in a hauler, set autopilot to go thru high sec, and go make a sandwich... since bpo's take up practically NO CARGO SPACE... either transport them in something strong or something fast. Anyone who whines about suicide ganks needs to be quiet and use their head. It is sooooo easy to avoid having this happen to you. EVE is a PVP game. Anywhere in the game a player can shoot another player. And btw, to the author of this post: you said that every change to the game is made in favor of pirates???? .....wow
|
Athren Soulsteal
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 19:06:00 -
[45]
Quote: And btw, to the author of this post: you said that every change to the game is made in favor of pirates????
Actually anyone that has played for any length of time knows about the Prat welfare program. And itÆs true, every game play change, from gold to present, has been made because of Prats. Yes, some are to patch loopholes used by Prats but most are just layers to the Prat welfare program. But thatÆs been discussed to death. Everyone that Plays EVE should keep in mind that most of the early developers were PKers in other games, which is why they were the early Prats in EVE. Do not confuse PKers with PVPers, there is a big difference.
The point is, EVE is created by design to be a PKer game (not a PVP) so the first thing you have to get rid of is any notions of fair play or ôrules of engagementö
What the original poster stated is true, the game play has changed to allow for more PKing (also know as ganking). Early on in the game there was more balance for security rating. Before adding the ôgate guardsö EVE had basically a Calvary system. The way it worked was that as soon as a player with a neg status went into a system they received a msg (kind of like the current aggression notice) that told them they were unwanted and had X amount of time to leave the system before the navy attacked them. X=seconds/system/sec rate. What this did was prevent neg sec players from just sitting in a system (forget them camping a gate) for any length of time. They had to get in do what ever they were trying to do and get out. That was balanced and fair, which of course goes against PKing (and the Prats complained) so it was changed to what we have now.
Now as the exploit part, in order to recognize the exploit the OP is talking about you have to look at the bigger picture.
Player A creates avatar ôIamPKer1ö trains him for a day and because of funding from an Alt is ready to start Gate Ganking. His PartnerÆs Avatar ôIhelpPKer2ö (alt IhelpPKer1 is currently being deleted) is also sitting there in an Indy. By the end of the day IamPker1 has too low a sec rating to continue so he is thrown on the conveyor belt to become solient green. The next day two players switch places and continue gathering their ill boongotie. The next day ôIamPKer3ö is bornà Rinse and repeat. The ôExploitö is that there is no Risk vs. Reward to suicide gankers.
Some examples we brought up 2 years ago about this was ôA CS player using an AWP, wallhack and Aimbotö There is no risk so it was an exploit. We also used this example and thatÆs where we found the flaw in our logic. ôA lvl60 Barby in D2 jumping in to a new player game and going hostile then slaughtering to a party of lvl12sö ThatÆs an exploit because the was no risk to the Barby. THEN were reminded that the Devs were the lvl60 barbys and that PKing a group of lvl12s was the point they were after.
Therefore itÆs not an exploit but actually by design to allow PKing. Look and I mean realy look at the dev blog and you will understand that the DEVs are not interested in PVP but in not only allowing but aiding and encouraging PKing.
So anytime you want to say somethingÆs not fair keep in mind that you are supposed to be the lvl12 player getting ganked or become the lvl60 barby and do the ganking.
Oh and welcome to EVE.
|
Prestis
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 20:20:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Prestis on 19/05/2006 20:26:19
Originally by: Athren Soulsteal Actually anyone that has played for any length of time knows about the Prat welfare program. And itÆs true, every game play change, from gold to present, has been made because of Prats.
Come up with one single game change that has benefited piracy in any way since beta and I'll list 20 that have specifically reduced/hurt/countered it.
Originally by: Athren Soulsteal Player A creates avatar ôIamPKer1ö trains him for a day and because of funding from an Alt is ready to start Gate Ganking. His PartnerÆs Avatar ôIhelpPKer2ö (alt IhelpPKer1 is currently being deleted) is also sitting there in an Indy. By the end of the day IamPker1 has too low a sec rating to continue so he is thrown on the conveyor belt to become solient green. The next day two players switch places and continue gathering their ill boongotie. The next day ôIamPKer3ö is bornà Rinse and repeat. The ôExploitö is that there is no Risk vs. Reward to suicide gankers.
Except that the recycled alt has what, a couple of days worth of training? His T1 frigate or cruiser with no skills behind it will last all of three seconds of low-sec gate sentry fire and he won't be able to suicide on a pod in high-sec.
|
Athren Soulsteal
|
Posted - 2006.05.20 18:32:00 -
[47]
Quote: Come up with one single game change that has benefited piracy in any way since beta and I'll list 20 that have specifically reduced/hurt/countered it.
where to start, actually lets start by quoting myself.
Quote: The way it worked was that as soon as a player with a neg status went into a system they received a msg (kind of like the current aggression notice) that told them they were unwanted and had X amount of time to leave the system before the navy attacked them.
If you have played since beta then you remember this. The sec rating system was as follows; a player could not go into a system with sec rated higher than their security rating without being insta popped. A û1.0 player could no go in to 1.0 space without every thing from the bases to the navy attacking them. And even in .9 space they had 15 min to get out before the navy found them. They were kicked to .8 and lower. AND attacking anyone in .1 to 1,0 space that you were not at war with caused the timer to start. The sec of a system set how long before the Calvary would arrive but they would eventually show up.
LetÆs ignore the fact than the prats at the time were in BS so could tank the navyÆs frigs and cruisers and that most of the Prats were û10 so when they attacked some one it did not flag the aggression timer (You canÆt take a sec hit lower than û10). These Prats cried that they should be allowed to go where they wanted because this was a Pkers game and they needed someone to PK.
The DEVs responded by reducing the sec rating reqs so that they could come back into civilized space and removing the Calvary. To pacify the players that were getting ganked they added the gate guns and guards but instructed them to ignore everyone that did not target them or the gate (billboards did not exist yet).
Quote: Except that the recycled alt has what, a couple of days worth of training? His T1 frigate or cruiser with no skills behind it will last all of three seconds of low-sec gate sentry fire and he won't be able to suicide on a pod in high-sec
Exactly, thatÆs why they are called suicide attacks. They donÆt intend to use the avatar for anything but to kill and harass players and steal their stuff. They are not creating a Prat avatar and just starting in high sec space. They are creating a throwaway avatar in order to bypass the security rating rules. If there is no risk that you will have to live by your actions then there is not any balance. Also as I said every change in game play has been made because of Prats, the lengths of time to kill of time is one of those made in response to Prats (as is the timer on jetcans and number of drones or even that drons are jettisoned in cans)
OK, now name 20 things the reduced or hurt Prats. Countered doesnÆt count because what was countered were the exploits or loopholes. Countered = bugfix
|
Requiescat
|
Posted - 2006.05.20 22:55:00 -
[48]
a player contacted me a few weeks ago and wanted me to make an alt and join his corp of suicide gankers. i told him he had to be joking and that he was an idiot, because ccp are going to whip out the ban stick and put a stop to this kind of thing.
of course, ccp has done nothing about it. they just sit idly by while people take advantage of this day after day, they make alts, they kill people, then they throw away the alts.
perhaps something like the system on aol instant messenger; the more quickly you send messages the less messages you can send. maybe limiting the number of alts someone can make and trash within a certain amount of time is what's in order. Max sig image dimensions are 400w x 120h & 24,000 byte filesize. --Jorauk |
Outa Rileau
|
Posted - 2006.05.21 01:49:00 -
[49]
how can an ubernewb char with frig lvl 3 kill anything? even a hauler?
It takes more than clicking "Create character" flying to jita, saying *bewm bewm*, and throwing the new character away to actually gain something... i can only imagine such an alt to kill an ibis
|
Gothikia
|
Posted - 2006.05.21 12:15:00 -
[50]
Originally by: BH Runner There has always been the presence of suicide vessels, people willing to trade their ships for a shot at killing someone before concord kills them. Think of it as assassination, it exists, the police respond, bu often not in time.
Bombageddons ftw :)
Regeneration Recruitment |
|
gfldex
|
Posted - 2006.05.21 14:26:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Athren Soulsteal
Player A creates avatar ôIamPKer1ö trains him for a day and because of funding from an Alt is ready to start Gate Ganking. His PartnerÆs Avatar ôIhelpPKer2ö (alt IhelpPKer1 is currently being deleted) is also sitting there in an Indy. By the end of the day IamPker1 has too low a sec rating to continue so he is thrown on the conveyor belt to become solient green. The next day two players switch places and continue gathering their ill boongotie. The next day ôIamPKer3ö is bornà Rinse and repeat. The ôExploitö is that there is no Risk vs. Reward to suicide gankers.
No one day old char is able to solo gank a hauler at a gate. You need at least 3 of them and a bit of luck.
But anyway what is the fun in an easy game?
-- $ perl -n -e 'print "Stop blameing pirates! Oveur is the root of all evil!\n" if m/podkill|lost my ship|gank|gate camp|Verone/;'
|
mamolian
|
Posted - 2006.05.21 14:59:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Nathan32Derby UK
Imagine my disgust when i get attacked in a 0.8 system right on top of the gate in a pimped for space iteron 5, 5 named expanders, 22500m3 of loot including all bp's that were accumulated from the start of the game.
Personally I find that hilarious.. what other game gives you that kicked in the nutz feeling when you loose all your hard work to a silly mistake :)
Nathan, in real life if someone wants to kill you.. with little care for the consequences or what happens to their own life, they will succeed.
If I see an oppertuinity to kill a wealthy business man, and somehow along the way manage to get his suitcase full of diamonds.. perhaps 5 years in prison for manslaughter wouldnt be such a bad sentence.. when you consider you can retire never having to work another day in your life..
The same is true in eve.. if a group of battleships set up for gank want to kill an afk faction battleship pilot sitting outside the stations in Rens.. or oursulaert.. Not even concord can save em.. The best concord can offer.. is they will also die for their actions..
I do agree on one point how ever.. the system isnt perfect, there should be some form of higher punishment for gankers in high sec space.. loosing like 0.05 standing isnt enough of a deterrant..
But then again.. the old saying "dont put all your eggs in one basket" applies. The idea of being safe anywhere in this game is an obsolete notion..
-------------------------------
|
mamolian
|
Posted - 2006.05.21 15:01:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Yazoul Samaiel [ Using cans prob helps so at least if u lose ur ship u can collect ur cans later with a password ofc.
Cans can be freely scooped by an enemy hauler.. passwords only apply when the cans anchored ;p
-------------------------------
|
Kel Gunrunner
|
Posted - 2006.05.22 02:32:00 -
[54]
I remember when this happened to me when i was moving corp, lost almost evrything I owned,was a very harsh blow....
but looking back, i could have prevented it, Shield tanking ur mids works alright if u cant use a transport, but the best defence is containers, throw ur stuff in secure cans and they wont throw away a ship for it, (best named expanders are also attractive if its just 2 suicide cruisers)
its an expensive lesson dude but its not an exploit
|
franny
|
Posted - 2006.05.22 04:20:00 -
[55]
Edited by: franny on 22/05/2006 04:22:06 *edit because I can't spell*
Originally by: SUPER J0SH 6. Trail with an alt of your own so you can loot your own can should this situation arise.
Wouldn't the can be flagged as property of the killer.... presumably they have gangmates close by....
I scan probed down a war target that logged off while still on timer, and we blew up his caracal, when I scooped the can it was saying "be flagged to *insert war target's name here*'s corp", now it makes no difference to me as 1) i'm in Syndicate, 2) i'm at war and yes I probed down his pod too ----------------------------------------- TCC Diplomatic core + combat pilot talk or shoot, makes no difference to me :) |
Flash Landsraad
|
Posted - 2006.05.22 10:44:00 -
[56]
This is not WoW where you are given a complimentary pampers nappy to protect you in secure areas. EVE secure areas are areas where concord patrol and kill those that attack in high sec.
As long as their ships were destroyed by Concord this is not an exploit and they were allowed to attack you. Stop whining and suck it up. As far as I know this has been allowed since the beginning.
Concord would have insta jammed him and webbed him down to no speed. THeir damage would have gotten more and more and more until it overpowered his awesome tank and he died. He was in a ship designed to carry out this role and it achieved that.
Stop whining.
|
fire 59
|
Posted - 2006.05.22 11:45:00 -
[57]
Anyone who afk hauls in empire and not in t2 indy with valuables deserves to get blown up imo. Use more common sense
Iron and G eat babie's , my views are my own, they do not refect my corp or my alliance |
Dival
|
Posted - 2006.05.22 12:02:00 -
[58]
This incident is something that unfortunately happens(passes) very often, which I do not understand is for that to someone who commits a crime the assurance he(she) pays the value of the ship, if this was in the royal(real) life the assurance not him(her) daria nothing of money for using the ship to commit a crime, serious a little so easily as that the ships that Concord destroys is not paid the assurance since they have been used of criminal way
|
Matthew
|
Posted - 2006.05.22 12:17:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Leandro Salazar I think the biggest problem with the suicide ganking (aside from the sociopathic aspects of (ab)using what I would call a loophole rather than an exploit) is that there is NO WARNING whatsoever about it anywhere in the game.
The game tells you what will happen if you shoot someone in high-sec space. If you choose to assume that means that no-one will try it anyway, then that is your mistake. Nowhere does the game state that you are immune from attack in high-sec space. If the game told you every possible thing any player could think up to do, then all your play-time would be taken up reading the manual instead of actually playing. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines. |
Matthew
|
Posted - 2006.05.22 12:17:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Michele Thanatosis Adding cargo scanning to the list of hostile acts in .5 and greater space would go along way to reducing throw away ganking in high sec space. There really is no reason to scan in High sec space unless your gonna gank anyways.
There are many other reasons you might want to cargo scan.
For example, if you run an NPC trade route, you might want to sit outside the station scanning every hauler that goes in and out to find out who else is running it.
You might want to find out who's hauling in loads of competing product to sell under cover of an alt.
You might just be bored and curious, or looking for some inspiration.
Sure, those actions may lead to hostilities further down the line, but the action itself is not agressive.
Scanning someone cannot be considered agression, because it does not damage them or disrupt their progress in any way. Concord is there to discourage agression in secure space, not to protect your privacy.
Originally by: Mordrake As it stands now these "players" just sit and scan with impunity until they find a target that will probably pay off for them what they will loose on what will not be covered for my insurance. No skill or gile involved here folks... just griefers plane and simple. Leaches with marginal intelligence and no skill.
You don't think it takes any intelligence to know the value of practically every item they could possibly come across, and sum up practically any random selection of stuff very quicky? To factor in the likelihood of cargo losses into the haul? To assess the likelihood of them being able to take down that specific ship before they get toasted? To assess the speed of the hauler as to whether they can do all that and still have time to shoot it before it jumps?
A suicide ganker with no intelligence or skill is going to lose money very quickly on the enterprise, and may not even succeed in destroying their targets at all.
Originally by: mamolian I do agree on one point how ever.. the system isnt perfect, there should be some form of higher punishment for gankers in high sec space.. loosing like 0.05 standing isnt enough of a deterrant..
Well, they do also lose the value of their ship (minus insurance payout). Increasing punishments would simply decrease the number of targets that were worth ganking, it wouldn't eliminate the gankers. And if the haulers knew the limit was higher, they would simply cram even more valuable stuff into even more slow, fragile super-expanded haulers, and continue presenting a tempting target.
The problem isn't really that the punishments aren't enough - it's that many people insist on presenting targets that are worth many times the cost of taking it out. They don't see the discrepancy between investing 50mill+ in stuff, then only 1mill in the ship to keep it safe in transit. You wouldn't spend ú10mill on a massive diamond, then hire a ú10 bike courier to take it to the bank for storage, would you?
Originally by: Nathan32Derby UK the fact that the game changes so much with little or no warning until u find out the hard way is tough for the players.
Except this mechanism has not seen any change for almost as far back as I can remember - Concord has never responded instantly. People have always been able to get a shot off in 0.8 space, and even 1.0 space before concord gets there. This sort of thing was happening right back at the dawn of the game (cruise kestrels anyone? ). ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |