Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
Shiloh Templeton
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
156
|
Posted - 2014.08.24 18:01:00 -
[31] - Quote
As a frequent explorer, I think the mini-game is fine.
It requires an investment in skills and knowledge on how to attack the nodes (at least in low/null). It also requires a balance of attention between hacking the can and watching for someone trying to catch you in the sig. Ghost sites require that you complete the mini-game with speed.
If the mini-game was removed it would just mean more competition.
|
Oxide Ammar
152
|
Posted - 2014.08.25 08:18:00 -
[32] - Quote
CCP Developers know how sucky exploring right now and they never thought about it before implementing it ingame, but as courtesy from CCP developer to another they won't trash the whole system they implemented and tagged Odessy as expansion name for it.
1- reworking the whole thing means the paid hours they spent for that aspect are a waste ( loss).
2- who ever invented this mini game and loot spew at the end is CCP developer(s), unless they confess they screwed it up no other CCP developer will point it out on behalf of the creator of this mess is going to say we screwed it up ( at the end they are colleagues in same Company)
May be you will think what the hell this have to do with failed aspect in the game, but it's your pixel game that you are playing in your free time...it's their career and work they do as living.
You can apply this to every game out there with broken ***** stuff in it even the game as whole is good in concept, best example to this is BF4, if anyone play this game since launch you will know how much BF4 was total screwed up game with massive amount of bugs, EA deployed truck load of patches over and over to fix it, at certain point they announced they won't be deploying any fixes and they will focusing on future projects coming out ! that means they reached a break even point beyond will be taken into account of loss and they are spending working hours fixing it more than they spent at creating the game from scratch.
Lady Areola Fappington: -áSolo PVP isn't dead!-á You just need to make sure you have your booster, remote rep, cyno, and emergency Falcon alts logged in and ready before you do any solo PVPing. |
Tolkaz Khamsi
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.25 14:05:00 -
[33] - Quote
Princess Bride wrote:I'd rather CCP spent time reworking the POS system or a number of other things before spending more time on exploration.
I've been waiting for the long-promised POS fixes for...years, it seems like. But I get the feeling that the POS codebase is such a scary mess that no CCP dev wants to touch it for fear of screwing it up worse. It needs a total re-think, starting with the idea of making a POS more like a mini-outpost that players can live in. (I.e., let me actually dock up in my hangar, allow me to set up clone vats and repair facilities, allow me to repackage items, etc.) That's what I'd like to see. In reality? I think we're stuck with the crappy POS stuff for a long time to come.
|
Stone-Cold Gunther Sabre
Apollo Technologies Inc
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 13:36:00 -
[34] - Quote
Just my opinion but although the mini-game itself could be a lot better it serves a good function in that it keeps the explorer's attention from being 100% dscan+local during the most vulnerable during exploration. Makes it more exciting and adds a little player skill to the proceedings (not loads, but a little).
I would like to see CCP spending time on more variety in the exploration sites. I know they added ghost sites (+1 from me) but they could do loads more.
E.g. 1. A site that drops a map to another hidden site (with awesome loot) within 1-2 jumps. You have 15 mins to find it... 2. Sites dropping puzzle fragments that must be combined/can be sold. Unlocks interesting sites, BPC's whatever. 3. A variety of mini-games to keep things more interesting, or unlocking different nodes in the mini game releases different loot. BPC nodes, Data core nodes, [FAVOURITE DATA LOOT INSERTED HERE] nodes.
I don't know. CCP could get creative.
|
Lenell
Night Raven Task Force Night Raven Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 14:49:00 -
[35] - Quote
My issue with the scanning minigame is it's only half of a "game". It has tactics, but no strategy.
What I mean is the concept of balancing your health and attack when choosing which blocking node to attack, or when to use your bonus things is just fine. That's a game that forces you to think about the short term, "Should I use this wrench now, or save it. Should I attack this node first, or that other one?"
It lacks strategy in you don't know where the goal is, the core. At the start of the game you don't know where you're going besides a vague knowledge of it's usually in the farthest place from your start. You can't plan strategically as in "I need to head over towards the core, so I should save my powerups for an unlucky blocking node."
If you uncover too many bad nodes while flailing around? Tough, you lose. Bad luck and a whole pile of nodes that heal other nodes get uncovered? Tough, you lose. It's not failing due to making a mistake or a bad move, it's failing because of bad luck. That's never fun.
What I would suggest is something like this. When you attack and defeat a blocking node, have it display a direction to the system core. Or if that's too clear cut and makes things too easy, make it display two or three arrows to possible system core locations. Just something to give you a hint towards the goal, allowing you to plan your route as you make progress.
Right now I absolutely hate it, because when I fail at the minigame I never feel like "Oh I made a mistake, I should learn from it and do better next time", I feel "Oh I got screwed over by random placement of the nodes. I sure hope I don't get screwed over next time." |
Stone-Cold Gunther Sabre
Apollo Technologies Inc
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 17:54:00 -
[36] - Quote
Lenell wrote:... because when I fail at the minigame I never feel like "Oh I made a mistake, I should learn from it and do better next time", I feel "Oh I got screwed over by random placement of the nodes. I sure hope I don't get screwed over next time."
I agree! There are thing you can do to increase your chances like clear the outside edge first and aim for furthest away from the start point as the core is often somewhere there but basically you are left to the whims of the generating algorithm and all you can basically do is hope its an easy one. |
|
CCP Bayesian
1154
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 17:55:00 -
[37] - Quote
I've actually been prototyping some additions to Hacking as part of a small side project in my "20% Time".
The first is a distance indicator that tells you how far away the last node uncovered is from "good stuff". This helps with second by second decision making by letting you follow trends. This also helps determine which Defense Software to attack first. On top of which it generally needs less clicks to complete a hack. I'm experimenting with definitions of "good stuff".
The second is to help with having more strategic decisions whilst actually hacking. I added multiple cores which unlock explicit bits of the loot in the container. This gives the hacker the ability to balance more of the risk vs. reward themselves as they go rather than it being an all or nothing thing.
Both of these changes give scope for more interesting Defense Software and Utilities. I'd like to alter the Restoration Node substantially as well to make it less overpowered and generally more interesting.
I want to make clear that there is no real ETA for when these changes might hit TQ but I wanted you to know that the state of Hacking is definitely something I and others care about and something someone is actually working on. EVE Software Engineer Team Space Glitter |
|
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
441
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 18:37:00 -
[38] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:I've actually been prototyping some additions to Hacking as part of a small side project in my "20% Time".
The first is a distance indicator that tells you how far away the last node uncovered is from "good stuff". This helps with second by second decision making by letting you follow trends. This also helps determine which Defense Software to attack first. On top of which it generally needs less clicks to complete a hack. I'm experimenting with definitions of "good stuff".
The second is to help with having more strategic decisions whilst actually hacking. I added multiple cores which unlock explicit bits of the loot in the container. This gives the hacker the ability to balance more of the risk vs. reward themselves as they go rather than it being an all or nothing thing.
Both of these changes give scope for more interesting Defense Software and Utilities. I'd like to alter the Restoration Node substantially as well to make it less overpowered and generally more interesting.
I want to make clear that there is no real ETA for when these changes might hit TQ but I wanted you to know that the state of Hacking is definitely something I and others care about and something someone is actually working on.
good to know, thanks for telling us :) Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
67
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 18:38:00 -
[39] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:I want to make clear that there is no real ETA for when these changes might hit TQ but I wanted you to know that the state of Hacking is definitely something I and others care about and something someone is actually working on.
Thank you. It's good to know something is going on. Even if it's a protoype. Hopefully it's sooner than later with new 6 weeks gap releases. Btw are you responsible for non combat exploration as a whole or it's just a antoher assignment in road to make cluster better place? Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.-á
I am the night. I'm Bantam. |
|
CCP Bayesian
1155
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 18:49:00 -
[40] - Quote
I'm on Team Space Glitter and our mission right now is to basically improve gameplay content related stuff. We're committed to doing a lot of tools work to speed up all the designers as well as fixing and creating new content.
Currently we're making NPC Authoring easier whilst our design focused people (FoxFour and Affinity) are coming up with some new stuff and plans for fixing some existing content that badly needs work.
Hacking sort of fits into that but I'm working on it because I had a big hand in designing it and it's never made it to the quality the team who worked on it liked particularly. The current implementation is functional but shallow and misses some key features of the original design as well as the ideas we had for improving things as we worked on it. I'm working on it as part of some self-determined time we get to work on these sorts of projects that otherwise fall further down our priority list. EVE Software Engineer Team Space Glitter |
|
|
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
278
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 18:56:00 -
[41] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:I've actually been prototyping some additions to Hacking as part of a small side project in my "20% Time".
The first is a distance indicator that tells you how far away the last node uncovered is from "good stuff". This helps with second by second decision making by letting you follow trends. This also helps determine which Defense Software to attack first. On top of which it generally needs less clicks to complete a hack. I'm experimenting with definitions of "good stuff".
The second is to help with having more strategic decisions whilst actually hacking. I added multiple cores which unlock explicit bits of the loot in the container. This gives the hacker the ability to balance more of the risk vs. reward themselves as they go rather than it being an all or nothing thing.
Both of these changes give scope for more interesting Defense Software and Utilities. I'd like to alter the Restoration Node substantially as well to make it less overpowered and generally more interesting.
I want to make clear that there is no real ETA for when these changes might hit TQ but I wanted you to know that the state of Hacking is definitely something I and others care about and something someone is actually working on.
Honestly, the hacking game is not redeemable. Simply add an autocomplete button. That way players can skip over the mini-game wack-a-mole if they want to. I would even accept an autocomplete button that was gimped in AI over a "real" person solution. I don't play, I just fourm warrior. |
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
278
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 18:58:00 -
[42] - Quote
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:I kind of like it. Its a nice blend of character skill and actual skill. Just saying.
You sir are completely out of your mind. There is no actual skill involved. It is simply a button click fest. Actually, I take that back. There is some player skill involved. Pressing that button faster and faster is a kinda a player skill.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
67
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 19:01:00 -
[43] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:The current implementation is functional but shallow and misses some key features of the original design as well as the ideas we had for improving things as we worked on it. I'm working on it as part of some self-determined time we get to work on these sorts of projects that otherwise fall further down our priority list.
Can you be more specific on this 'key features of original design"? Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.-á
I am the night. I'm Bantam. |
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
278
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 19:04:00 -
[44] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Wes Korhal wrote:... But this hacking thing, I'm sorry, was not a brilliant move, whichever way you put it. I'd rather type text commands on a bash console, that's more fun than that. On first few sites minigame is fine. Problem starts when exploration is your main profession. I hacked 6 sites in one system once. I must logged off after that. My mouse button failed to cooperate. Hacking game is weakest part of exploration now. It's ok if you do it casually, but when i go to null for my few days expeditions i'm sick of it at the end. Basically we have short time between releasess now. I know there are more serious issiues to deal with such as sov system, but how much resources would it take to rebuild hacking? I mean whole idea is fine but less clicking more thinking would be nice.
I used to do hacking/exploration as a main source of income. I gave it up because the minigame is tedious and skill-less. But even if the minigame was entertaining, the drops are largely worthless, unless you get some rare tower bpc. So now all i do is shoot other explores who wander into my lowsec home.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior. |
|
CCP Bayesian
1155
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 19:21:00 -
[45] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:CCP Bayesian wrote:The current implementation is functional but shallow and misses some key features of the original design as well as the ideas we had for improving things as we worked on it. I'm working on it as part of some self-determined time we get to work on these sorts of projects that otherwise fall further down our priority list. Can you be more specific on this 'key features of original design"?
Sure, it's also worthwhile reading through my older posts from this time last year for more context.
Originally we planned for Utilities to be something you could harvest from Hacking attempts, sell on the market and then fit to your Hacking module. This fitting decision and harvesting is pretty important for adding strategy to the original design but not sufficient I think. There is also a greater number of Utilities and Defense Software that do more interesting things that have been designed out but were cut from implementation to polish other areas and help keep balancing straightforward. In particular more 'things' would help out the easier systems with more variety as well as posing different problems. EVE Software Engineer Team Space Glitter |
|
|
CCP Bayesian
1155
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 19:30:00 -
[46] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:I kind of like it. Its a nice blend of character skill and actual skill. Just saying. You sir are completely out of your mind. There is no actual skill involved. It is simply a button click fest. Actually, I take that back. There is some player skill involved. Pressing that button faster and faster is a kinda a player skill.
We actually have an AI we use for testing which does a lot more than clicking quickly and doesn't cheat. I'm not going to say there is a huge skill ceiling but there certainly is one particularly in the harder systems. I've not yet seen a guide online that hits all the points we use. Granted they get the majority of really meaningful things correct and Hacking in hostile space is a bit different to a computer crunching.
I actually quite like the idea of remaking the AI to be used in EVE, dumbing it down a bit and slowing it up so people can choose to fit an Auto-Hacking module. You'd be less successful overall but it'd be nice for people who don't want to Hack themselves. EVE Software Engineer Team Space Glitter |
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
67
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 19:36:00 -
[47] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote: Sure, it's also worthwhile reading through my older posts from this time last year for more context.
Originally we planned for Utilities to be something you could harvest from Hacking attempts, sell on the market and then fit to your Hacking module. This fitting decision and harvesting is pretty important for adding strategy to the original design but not sufficient I think. There is also a greater number of Utilities and Defense Software that do more interesting things that have been designed out but were cut from implementation to polish other areas and help keep balancing straightforward. In particular more 'things' would help out the easier systems with more variety as well as posing different problems.
Indeed some of this was mentioned before. Are you planing to implement some of those in the future or just scraped it and starting from zero? Harvested tools and improving hacking modules are promising. I was digging in hacking minigames lately, EvE has original concept of it but if it required less clicking with more strategy it would be great. Luck factor is also needed but let's not make it prime for every hack attempt. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.-á
I am the night. I'm Bantam. |
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
229
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 19:37:00 -
[48] - Quote
You are wrong.
I think it is a perfectly decent activity. Shame it doesn't see more application in eve tbh.
Hasikan Miallok wrote: + chance
So a bit like chess right? |
|
CCP Bayesian
1155
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 19:59:00 -
[49] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:CCP Bayesian wrote: Sure, it's also worthwhile reading through my older posts from this time last year for more context.
Originally we planned for Utilities to be something you could harvest from Hacking attempts, sell on the market and then fit to your Hacking module. This fitting decision and harvesting is pretty important for adding strategy to the original design but not sufficient I think. There is also a greater number of Utilities and Defense Software that do more interesting things that have been designed out but were cut from implementation to polish other areas and help keep balancing straightforward. In particular more 'things' would help out the easier systems with more variety as well as posing different problems.
Indeed some of this was mentioned before. Are you planing to implement some of those in the future or just scraped it and starting from zero? Harvested tools and improving hacking modules are promising. I was digging in hacking minigames lately, EvE has original concept of it but if it required less clicking with more strategy it would be great. Luck factor is also needed but let's not make it prime for every hack attempt.
I'm basically tackling things in the order of what makes the most sense to improve Hacking the most with the least effort. To that end I'm mostly restricting myself to things that wouldn't take much additional effort on behalf of our team to bring forward. Bigger projects will have to wait until we can schedule it into our main development time. EVE Software Engineer Team Space Glitter |
|
Renegade Heart
Smack My Ship Up
164
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 20:28:00 -
[50] - Quote
I love the new system. It provides a distraction for those running them in dangerous areas while you prepare to blow them up. Awesome job CCP! |
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
67
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 21:21:00 -
[51] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:I actually quite like the idea of remaking the AI to be used in EVE, dumbing it down a bit and slowing it up so people can choose to fit an Auto-Hacking module. You'd be less successful overall but it'd be nice for people who don't want to Hack themselves. It would be great for those who don't like hacking. Having an oppportuiny is always better than forcing to do certain activity.
CCP Bayesian wrote:I also think there is a lot of room for giving high skill level Hackers something else to do. What might it be? Any projects?
CCP Bayesian wrote:I'm basically tackling things in the order of what makes the most sense to improve Hacking the most with the least effort. To that end I'm mostly restricting myself to things that wouldn't take much additional effort on behalf of our team to bring forward. Some kind of tiering? General path with adding new defense systems and utlities? Easier to add new elements without rework whole process.
Do you consider tweaking loot tables for data sites? If you going to spread loot among few data cores in the future it will happen eventually i presume, but for now, datacores, depcryptors takes too much volume. It would be good to hear some statement: yes, no, i have no influence on that. Communication is better than blind guessing. We have a situation with possibilty to explore without being bonded to base of operation, but have not enough cargo to make use of it. We have manufacturing releasess on plate and loot from data sites is used in some of the process. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.-á
I am the night. I'm Bantam. |
Sargeant Hellian
Fault Line Industries Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 22:12:00 -
[52] - Quote
I would also like to add a big middle finger to the hacking dev for including empty cans, or cans with one carbon in them in nulsec.
You deserve to be unemployed.
Also, big middle finger to those hacks where 5+ gimp nodes (minus to virus damage) are discovered. Really? Did you guys even TRY data/relic sites?
You know, like... using the in game equipment, not dev modules that are instant win?
You do realize that any idiot can make 2x more money shooting rats?
Do you enjoy just screwing players over? ie - Datacore research npcs, complete stealth removal of faction BPCs?
|
Sargeant Hellian
Fault Line Industries Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.26 22:50:00 -
[53] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:I kind of like it. Its a nice blend of character skill and actual skill. Just saying. You sir are completely out of your mind. There is no actual skill involved. It is simply a button click fest. Actually, I take that back. There is some player skill involved. Pressing that button faster and faster is a kinda a player skill. We actually have an AI we use for testing which does a lot more than clicking quickly and doesn't cheat. I'm not going to say there is a huge skill ceiling but there certainly is one particularly in the harder systems. I've not yet seen a guide online that hits all the points we use. Granted they get the majority of really meaningful things correct and Hacking in hostile space is a bit different to a computer crunching. I actually quite like the idea of remaking the AI to be used in EVE, dumbing it down a bit and slowing it up so people can choose to fit an Auto-Hacking module. You'd be less successful overall but it'd be nice for people who don't want to Hack themselves. I also think there is a lot of room for giving high skill level Hackers something else to do.
so you just admitted that you don't QA hack and data sites. You use an AI to test it. That's not the same as having someone who works in QA actually DO what we have to do. no wonder it's in such a crap state at the moment.
Test manager - "Hey, program on my desktop... how is data and hacking? Fun?"
Program - " Beep. Hacking and data WORKING AS INTENDED."
Test manager - "Great! I am going to play plants vs zombies."
Good job on admitting you don't test. |
TheButcherPete
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
481
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 00:40:00 -
[54] - Quote
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:The old way, pre-Odyssey, left me feeling kind of empty. Lock target, activate module, wait 15minutes, collect loot.
The mini game, while not perfect, at least is a challenge. I like it now the the spew is gone.
FTFY THE KING OF EVE RADIO
If EVE is real, does that mean all of us are RMTrs? |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2803
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 01:11:00 -
[55] - Quote
the largest disappointment for me was that relic sites and data sites are identical. The only difference is the decoration and the module you have to use. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
28974
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 01:54:00 -
[56] - Quote
I already voiced my opinion about the Mini Hacking Game along with some of the changes I'd like to see implemented earlier in this thread.
Other than what I already posted in this thread I gotta admit seeing CCP Bayesian posting here is quite a surprise. I like seeing Dev's active in the forums even though I may not believe* or agree with what they say.
Having said that, I gave each posted reply from CCP Bayesian in this thread a 'Like'.
DMC
*(Team Avatar work on prototype for WIS / FPS game play content in exploration sites)
Faction Standing Repair Plan | California Eve Players | (Proposal) Bring Back 'The Endless Battle' Missions |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
68
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 06:40:00 -
[57] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote: I like seeing Dev's active in the forums even though I may not believe* or agree with what they say.
Always better than silence. Good to know someone reading our posts. It's shame they don't have PvE oriented devs, like Fozzie and Rise, The Duo of Nerf, in balancing ship section. Good PvE would be solid base to improve EvE, most of players are PvEers. Most of them start with PvE and because PvE is weak, leave. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.-á
I am the night. I'm Bantam. |
Luwc
Brodozers Inc.
198
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 06:59:00 -
[58] - Quote
I like it.
you don't like it ? don't do it. http://hugelolcdn.com/i/267520.gif |
Stone-Cold Gunther Sabre
Apollo Technologies Inc
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 07:00:00 -
[59] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:I've actually been prototyping some additions to Hacking as part of a small side project in my "20% Time".
The first is a distance indicator that tells you how far away the last node uncovered is from "good stuff". This helps with second by second decision making by letting you follow trends. This also helps determine which Defense Software to attack first. On top of which it generally needs less clicks to complete a hack. I'm experimenting with definitions of "good stuff".
The second is to help with having more strategic decisions whilst actually hacking. I added multiple cores which unlock explicit bits of the loot in the container. This gives the hacker the ability to balance more of the risk vs. reward themselves as they go rather than it being an all or nothing thing.
Both of these changes give scope for more interesting Defense Software and Utilities. I'd like to alter the Restoration Node substantially as well to make it less overpowered and generally more interesting.
I want to make clear that there is no real ETA for when these changes might hit TQ but I wanted you to know that the state of Hacking is definitely something I and others care about and something someone is actually working on.
I think this is good news. While explorers want ISK too, I think exploration in Eve should primarily be about the fun of discovering something. There are plenty of other activities that get give you a better ISK/hr already. Making the mini-game a game of player skill will help, but also improve the variety of interesting things to find, maybe interesting locations only an explorer can access through hacking another site (key found in hacking site activates a disabled gate at a location found in another hacking site, or something). I'm sure there are tons of things that could be added. Hope your improvements hit TQ asap :-) |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
68
|
Posted - 2014.08.27 07:32:00 -
[60] - Quote
Stone-Cold Gunther Sabre wrote:While explorers want ISK too, I think exploration in Eve should primarily be about the fun of discovering something. I don't mind lucrative loot from exploration. This is money driven activity. It's not "stable" income such as one hand difficulty L4's. Unless your scanner stop telling you what you found, and sites would be fully generated not premade there won't be any discovering in it.
I don't understand ppl complaing about carbon in cans. There shouldn't be situation that sites would grant us predictable profits. If you have problems with that fit cargo scanner. In fact i would like more useless items in cans and cherry pick "good" ones, space junk instead empty cans, salvaging and looting good stuff "firefly" style. Not mechanical "loot all and next!". Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.-á
I am the night. I'm Bantam. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |