Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 28 post(s) |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29947
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 17:03:24 -
[1111] - Quote
If you are explaining why the learning system sucks, the person is in denial. And will probably stay that way.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Dave Stark
7385
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 17:04:21 -
[1112] - Quote
but you don't need to be in pvp to gain a benefit from them that's the point [especially when you simply don't need to be in pvp at all] - as for hardwirings and things you do need to be in combat to gain any benefit (the same place they're at risk).
you can give people all the reasons under the sun to pvp, but if none of them mean more than their sp/hour - they would still rather dock up and log out than undock and shoot people. however with SP being disconnected from pretty much everything you interact with (it just accumulates, all the time) then there's pretty much never going to be a situation where pvping will mean more than their sp/hour unless they simply want to pvp. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29947
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 17:07:51 -
[1113] - Quote
most of the naysayers seem to admit it doesn't affect them, and then say some bit about an imaginary theme park.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
122
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 18:08:11 -
[1114] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:The Newface wrote:I really donGÇÖt get the problem.
You donGÇÖt HAVE to use learning implants. Only the most extreme MIN/MAX player would even think so. I have played for 8 years, multiple accounts and I have never plugged in lvl 5. I routinely run with lvl 3, thatGÇÖs about 45M ISK and compare to ships you lose your pod very rarely.
Taking learning implants away is dumbing down the game, im sorry but it seems almost the definition of dumbing it down. You donGÇÖt HAVE to use them, itGÇÖs a choice for the player, to GÇ£helpGÇ¥ players we want to remove the choice?
I just donGÇÖt get it, you can use the same argument for allot of aspects in EVE. GÇóHardwires GÇô you donGÇÖt HAVE to use them but you are better off if you do and you lose more ISK if you get podded. GÇóFaction ships GÇô you donGÇÖt HAVE to use them but youGÇÖre better off if you do and you lose more if you lose it. GÇóAnd so on.
Skill implants are a choice, you weigh it against the cost and the risk, thatGÇÖs whatGÇÖs EVE is about.
you don't HAVE to pvp either. the issue with your examples vs learning implants are that hardwirings, faction ships, etc all give you a direct advantage in the situation where you put them at risk. (which is risk vs reward done right, perfect examples of it - especially hardwirings) learning implants are only at risk in pvp (until red crosses start podding) and in that situation higher sp/hour gives you 0 benefit what so ever. it's that disconnect that means players just think "i don't need to pvp, so why bother risking my implants" rather than "sure i'll come on your drunken roam and generate some content".
Burner missions...lots of isk lost...I am sure that includes some of the most expensive implants in game...its PVE.
Again, if you want the benefit it is up to each player to make the choice for themselves.
Nothing wrong with how implants work, you are just exercising your choice to hide.
Accept it and move on. |
The Newface
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 18:24:32 -
[1115] - Quote
I guess IGÇÖm going to give up arguing this with a final reflection.
It seems most people who are for this suggestion is actually looking to make it easier/faster to get into big ships. I get the district feeling that these people would be happy if there were no skills at all.
There are many many games like that already, there is only one EVE though and I hope CCP understands how damaging this direction would be for the subscription rates.
The simpler a game is the less longevity it have, EVE is one of the oldest MMOGÇÖs and one of the reasons, a big one I believe is that you always have something to strive for and something to learn. Take that away and EVE will lose its appeal and yes I know, doom and gloom but I believe die.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29949
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 19:15:44 -
[1116] - Quote
The Newface wrote:I guess IGÇÖm going to give up arguing this with a final reflection.
It seems most people who are for this suggestion is actually looking to make it easier/faster to get into big ships. I get the district feeling that these people would be happy if there were no skills at all.
There are many many games like that already, there is only one EVE though and I hope CCP understands how damaging this direction would be for the subscription rates.
The simpler a game is the less longevity it have, EVE is one of the oldest MMOGÇÖs and one of the reasons, a big one I believe is that you always have something to strive for and something to learn. Take that away and EVE will lose its appeal and yes I know, doom and gloom but I believe die.
check yourself. some of the people in this discussion have everything trained, and are not lobbying in self interest.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Guttripper
State War Academy Caldari State
591
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 19:45:21 -
[1117] - Quote
After skimming through this thread...
..."new" players (and not another alt of a current player) are actually (attempt to) playing this ancient game??? |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 20:33:56 -
[1118] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Oh, now that's just hyperbole. I really don't think anyone is talking about the kind of consequences that cut your hitpoints in half for the rest of your character's life. I was using an extreme example to demonstrate why something being a choice to customize your character didn't inherently make that a good design. Although, replace "hitpoints" for "skill points" and you've almost described the attribute system. :) Quote:Attributes are meh. Yep.
Implants are not. They are a meaningful choice, and encourage decision making based on risk vs reward. (just because some people choose wrong and handcuff themselves is not reason to scrap that whole system) While I wouldn't want to paint my game design colleagues into a corner, I don't believe that implants are going anywhere. Only learning implants are in question. There have been suggestions in this thread and elsewhere that learning implants with flat learning speed bonuses might work in an attribute-free world. I think replacing learning speed implants with alternatives that encourage rather than discourage undocking is more likely, but I don't think anyone has yet come to any conclusions about what form that might take. If you have any thoughts on what alternative implant designs that do not affect training might feel as interesting as those that affect training rate, please share them. (Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.") As a suggestion make attributes a flat increase in learning speed and remove the old mechanic completely. use the licencing system you have developed with skins for training implants, make them time limited, and linked to account in the same way. They still need to be bought, and sought as drops then and we have the best of both worlds. The negative is it affects killboards online, but I am sure people are not so selfish that they would rather keep a poor system to pad their killboard But as an alternative removing learning implants and the learning component of hardwires, whilst keeping hardwires is probably an equally good alternative. . Licencing would work well here too. Create new time limited versions of the pirate implants to go with the existing ones (which retain their permanence ond preserve their value) to provide more choice and variety and available in more and new interesting ways, possibly player built. Keep permanent pirate implants available from their current sources.
This is a horrible idea. So you want to make it so that now the ONLY way to keep your training time up is to constantly keep buying temporary learning abilities? does anyone else think this is horrible?
|
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 20:42:11 -
[1119] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:Right... lets all fly around PVPing with no risk whatsoever other than the ship.... no thank you And why not? Isn't that risk enough? If you could scan for implants like you can scan for cargo, would anybody STOP to scan before attacking? You're judging each encounter by the ships you see in the overview, and you're shooting or bugging out based solely on that information. The value of the killmail is merely a (sometimes pleasant) surprise, a few hours after the fact. EVE PVP is driven by the ships (and by strategic goals), not by the implants. Regarding the question about incentivizing people to undock, if that's what you want CCP, then incentivize that directly. I did suggest giving SHIPS a skill training bonus as long as they're undocked in space, and got shot down because OMG everyone is going to afk cloak. That's still more exposure to PVP than remaining in station. But in any case, don't give the bonus to any ships that can cloak and people won't afk in them. Just give a big skill training bonus to T1 frigates (for the newbies), smaller bonuses to T1 cruisers (not so newbies), and then varying degrees of training bonus to other ships (T2, capital) as you see fit. Or give some other incentive, I don't know; I just think the issue is a bit like getting people to go to lowsec: subtle solutions won't work.
No the choice you make is weather or not you want to risk various levels of implants. for example I dabble in PVP extensively on another character in null. Some people never fly with more than +2 but I personally always fly with at least +4's in. does it cost more when i die? sure but that's my choice. Also this whole giving ships bonus.. you're kidding right? So the only way people can get bonuses is by being undocked... I can see 1000's of t1 frigs sitting cloaked in space all day.
One of the great things about eve is that I never have to worry about training while i'm away on vacation or away for a long weekend. Any mechanic that FORCES me to log into the game for training is an awful idea. It's the exact reason I hate WOW LOTR and every other mmo out there. |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 20:49:19 -
[1120] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Oh, now that's just hyperbole. I really don't think anyone is talking about the kind of consequences that cut your hitpoints in half for the rest of your character's life. I was using an extreme example to demonstrate why something being a choice to customize your character didn't inherently make that a good design. Although, replace "hitpoints" for "skill points" and you've almost described the attribute system. :) Quote:Attributes are meh. Yep.
Implants are not. They are a meaningful choice, and encourage decision making based on risk vs reward. (just because some people choose wrong and handcuff themselves is not reason to scrap that whole system) While I wouldn't want to paint my game design colleagues into a corner, I don't believe that implants are going anywhere. Only learning implants are in question. There have been suggestions in this thread and elsewhere that learning implants with flat learning speed bonuses might work in an attribute-free world. I think replacing learning speed implants with alternatives that encourage rather than discourage undocking is more likely, but I don't think anyone has yet come to any conclusions about what form that might take. If you have any thoughts on what alternative implant designs that do not affect training might feel as interesting as those that affect training rate, please share them. (Not that you'd necessarily pick them over learning implants in a head-to-head choice, but that you'd look at them and think "Wow, I'd like to undock with that plugged in.")
This would be a very difficult situation to deal with due to difficulty determining where you set the universal learning speed at. It seems like a serious punch in the gut of anyone who trained cybernetics to V and is using +5's if their learning speed is nerfed at all. At the same time it would be equally insulting if everyone got boosted up to their learning speed level. Personally I don't see a good way to remove the learning implants although I already made a post earlier in this thread how they could be improved with no remaps and doubling the effect of the implants. One way which was already discussed was if jumpcloning was reduced to a much shorter time period for in station clone swaps. say 2 hours or so. That would encourage much more people to participate in PVP as they would no longer be "stuck" in their expensive skulls. |
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
1078
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:04:19 -
[1121] - Quote
Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:It seems like a serious punch in the gut of anyone who trained cybernetics to V and is using +5's if their learning speed is nerfed at all. At the same time it would be equally insulting if everyone got boosted up to their learning speed level.
I don't agree at all that these two choices would be equally annoying to players.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:14:27 -
[1122] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:It seems like a serious punch in the gut of anyone who trained cybernetics to V and is using +5's if their learning speed is nerfed at all. At the same time it would be equally insulting if everyone got boosted up to their learning speed level. I don't agree at all that these two choices would be equally annoying to players.
So I'm assuming that one of the possible options which is being considered is boosting everyone up to "perfect mapping" and making that the flat rate is being considered. If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
217
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:14:46 -
[1123] - Quote
It's all about getting players to log in, it's all about getting players to stay around. So let's see how we can affect the game that could change that. We need to keep players active, interested and sticking around. IsnGÇÖt it best first to admit that there is a fairly high number of players in EVE that have zero interest in PVP. No matter what the hell you do with game mechanics, these people will never change their mind. They would rather quit EVE than take part in PVP so they stay in an NPC corp and love the game just as much as we do. So CCPGǪGǪ. Active, Interested and sticking around. Ah the very same problem every single CEO in EVE faces. How the hell do I keep these assholes logged in, interested and sticking around? I tried the, hey, hereGÇÖs free skill books, hereGÇÖs free ships, now letGÇÖs get the feck off station and go **** the locals off. PVP guys go yay \0/ industrial and PVE guys go really? Do we have too? I say yes! Come on, youGÇÖll have a laugh with the lads. So the lads show up, yup all of them, they listen and do a good job, have a great laugh, they even get a kill or 2. Some of them get into PVP some donGÇÖt. So it kind of worked a little. Do they all gain an interest in PVP? No, Not any more than they need too because they are being pushed into it. I even covered pod loss costs. It didnGÇÖt matter even a little. Bottom line, some will love it, some will hate it. Those that hate it will fight if pushed but will revert back to PVE/Indy the second you stop pushing them. You can dress a duck up as an Eagle but that fecker is gonna quack and head for the nearest water the second you take your eyes of him. ItGÇÖs unrealistic to think everyone who joins EVE will love PVP and it will keep them in game forever. Some will wander into EVE, have a laugh for a year or so and leave. Some will wander in and have a horrible time and leave in a very short time. No different than every single game out there. This idea to remove attributes and implants may work short term. I have very little faith in it working long term. Perhaps CCP taking a very active roll online in game. Lots of epic live events for newbs and bitter vets alike. Perhaps this whole Caroline star event is leading towards more of that. |
Reelin Antollare
Secret CONCORD
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:28:01 -
[1124] - Quote
Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants.
Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1366
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:30:22 -
[1125] - Quote
Reelin Antollare wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan. Why is planning for a long term return inherently bad? |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
83
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 21:43:18 -
[1126] - Quote
Reelin Antollare wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan.
When training any type of capital alt it makes a lot of sense to use +5's considering you're going to be training for at least a year to sit in the thing. 2 years if you want to REALLY be able to fly it (near max tank/ fitting/ drone/ gun/ nav skills etc.) |
Dave Stark
7389
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 22:03:10 -
[1127] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Reelin Antollare wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan. Why is planning for a long term return inherently bad?
because you're not getting a long term return, you're just picking what you want to train slowly.
we've been over this point.
the system just lets you pick a punishment - that's a bad system. something is going to have to train slowly, you just get to pick what it is. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1367
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 22:10:59 -
[1128] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Reelin Antollare wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan. Why is planning for a long term return inherently bad? because you're not getting a long term return, you're just picking what you want to train slowly. we've been over this point. the system just lets you pick a punishment - that's a bad system. something is going to have to train slowly, you just get to pick what it is. But you are getting a return in that you train less slowly. It doesn't bypass training, nor speed it to a great degree; that I can agree with. But if there is no return, why are you doing it? Furthermore why are you altering your gameplay to maintain this lack of return? Why did you alter training for it in the first place? |
Circumstantial Evidence
168
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 22:36:21 -
[1129] - Quote
CCP doesn't reimburse SP very often, usually responding that players received value for time spent, up to the point of the change. Game mechanics may change going forward, but past investments in time or isk weren't "wasted." |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
84
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 22:36:46 -
[1130] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Reelin Antollare wrote:Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:If that is the case what would happen for those who trained cybernetics to V just for the +5's? that's a 10day+ train which would essentially be for nothing if you're not planning on flying with high-grade implants. Empty quoting much? I have +5s plugged in, am not too old and yet would love this change happening. Considering it takes close to a year to offset the difference from +4 to +5, training cyb V if you don't plan on using hardwirings seems like a rather bad plan. Why is planning for a long term return inherently bad? because you're not getting a long term return, you're just picking what you want to train slowly. we've been over this point. the system just lets you pick a punishment - that's a bad system. something is going to have to train slowly, you just get to pick what it is. But you are getting a return in that you train less slowly. It doesn't bypass training, nor speed it to a great degree; that I can agree with. But if there is no return, why are you doing it? Furthermore why are you altering your gameplay to maintain this lack of return? Why did you alter training for it in the first place? Edit: Also, I haven't looked over your posts but your reasoning is a bit confusing in that it applies to the basic idea of a real time training system even without the details EvE's skill system adds. That being the case I have to ask what about implants makes your objection more pertinent to this than a system without them?
I am equally confused what he is trying to say. From the sounds of it he is reasoning the only reason to train cybernetics V is for the high-grade ship implants. |
|
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
84
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 22:39:46 -
[1131] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:CCP doesn't reimburse SP very often, usually responding that players received value for time spent, up to the point of the change. Game mechanics may change going forward, but past investments in time or isk weren't "wasted."
True. And if you trained Cybernetics V for the high-grade implants then no your time would not be wasted. However if you only trained it for the +5's then yes it would be. It would be simple for CCP to just refund the SP needed to train cybernetics from IV to V. Then if you wanted the skillpoints for the high-grades you just reapply them. If you only got it for the +5's you can just re delegate them to something else. It's actually a simple solution. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
407
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 23:14:00 -
[1132] - Quote
you train cybernetics v because the shame of being such a poor you don't have the +5% version of any hardwiring worth plugging in is horrible
well, back to polishing the officer mods on my titan |
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
84
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 23:23:11 -
[1133] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:you train cybernetics v because the shame of being such a poor you don't have the +5% version of any hardwiring worth plugging in is horrible
well, back to polishing the officer mods on my titan
Thank you for contributing nothing to the discussion. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
408
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 23:35:38 -
[1134] - Quote
Aureus Ahishatsu wrote:EvilweaselFinance wrote:you train cybernetics v because the shame of being such a poor you don't have the +5% version of any hardwiring worth plugging in is horrible
well, back to polishing the officer mods on my titan Thank you for contributing nothing to the discussion. oh please carry on the eight millionth "ccp made a change to the game that affected what skills I would have trained, give me a refund" which will get denied for the same reason as every other one: the skill wasn't removed |
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3844
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 23:52:15 -
[1135] - Quote
I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting it.
The Rules: 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Circumstantial Evidence
168
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 23:57:46 -
[1136] - Quote
For any change, the developers have to draw a line somewhere. If you have received +5 learning implant benefits longer than the training time, you got a benefit for time spent.
If you received less or no use of +5 learning implants prior to their removal, and weren't aware of this rumored change, then you would have some right to feel left out. But in looking at this thread, word is getting out. It started end of January, and is pushing over 250 unique posters with an awesome 25 from CCP Darwin, proving that they are considering this player feedback. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29950
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 00:05:35 -
[1137] - Quote
I'm not stuck on the absolute rate of SP, only relative. If the max rate is the only rate, that's fine. It would be liberating.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1367
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 00:26:20 -
[1138] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I'm not stuck on the absolute rate of SP, only relative. If the max rate is the only rate, that's fine. It would be liberating. I can't really disagree with that idea, but as a system it seems lacking. It removes any interaction with the system itself aside from building a sequential list, even if that interaction is a source of consternation for some. |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
1080
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 00:37:47 -
[1139] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:This idea to remove attributes and implants may work short term. I have very little faith in it working long term. I'm not a game designer (sorry I keep repeating this) but I can say with certainty that we're not making changes to manipulate players into staying with the game longer. We make changes to improve the game while retaining its unique character.
(Slippery-slope arguments notwithstanding, EVE's unique character is what has attracted many of us to CCP, and, for those of us who have moved to Iceland from elsewhere, it's what keeps us in this beautiful but formidable country. We're not going to gamble that unique character away to improve our metrics.)
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Tetsel
Heretic Army Overload Everything
154
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 01:03:40 -
[1140] - Quote
I'm a dumb pilot and I totally don't get the attribute/skill relationship back in the day, I lost a lot of SP/h because of that, forget to remap before changing my skill plan etc etcGǪ I didn't invest in implant cause I thought it was better to stack useless iskies instead of skilling fasterGǪ I made mistake cause I didn't pay enough attention to "Skills how it works" and I paid the priceGǪ That's what EVE is all about, remove those attribute/implant is just reducing player choice of what they can do, and simplify the game for those lazy whiners who don't want to learn how to master it.
Stoopid idea to get in more "lazy" players that used to think EVE was too difficult. It's all about $$$ and nothing with "better player experience"
My 2 isk
Loyal servent to Mother Amamake.
@EVE_Tetsel
Another Bittervet Please Ignore
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |