| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
41
   |
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm burned out from shooting structures for two years.
Please design a sovereignty system that doesn't involve only timers and absolutely ******** amounts of EHP, thanks.
I originally tried writing a nice OP about why shooting TCUs and SBUs and IHUBs is stupid and why Eve players desperately need something new and fun to shoot at, but then the gank-monster ate it and I cursed CCP and their terribad forums. So all you're going to get is this. |
Large Collidable Object
morons.
660
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
I agree - originally, the winter expansion was supposed to be a nullsec revamp, which we didn't see much of.
Anyway -a lot of nice little changes along witha few bad ones were delivered, so I there's enough left to do for summer, as long as they don't start doing 1000$ spaceparbie-jeans for 18 months again...
morons- sting like a butterfly and-ápost like a bee. |
Terminal Insanity
Convex Enterprises
Unprovoked Aggression
145
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
I agree POS warfare is tired, but what could they possibly replace it with?
It would have to give the owner of the POS a chance to defend it, and it cant just fall over in 30 minutes and be over... So what kind of mechanics do you propose? |
Hershman
G-Weezy
105
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:22:00 -
[4] - Quote
Go back to WoW / Can I haz stuff? / Cry moar / etc etc... |
Morganta
Peripheral Madness
The Midget Mafia
477
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:24:00 -
[5] - Quote
I don't mind the timers so much, that actually seems to be the fair thing (fair insofar as at least give the guy a chance to log in and watch his **** burn down)
the EHP is teh suck burnin them down as well as repping them up
The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:26:00 -
[6] - Quote
Where's the variation on type? Why do they all have 50% resists and countless HP? Why can't you put GUNS ON THEM? Why is there no penalty if no one shows up to defend them? Why aren't there ones with more HP than others? Why are they the sole determinant of sovereignty? Why, why, why... |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:31:00 -
[7] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:I agree POS warfare is tired, but what could they possibly replace it with?
It would have to give the owner of the POS a chance to defend it, and it cant just fall over in 30 minutes and be over... So what kind of mechanics do you propose?
Shoot-able ihubs anchored away from defence orientated structures that have level over rides corresponding to the systems military and industrial levels.
Level 5 approx 2.5mil EHP knocking it to level 4 removes the benefits of military and industrial 5 upgrades until its either repped up or passively recharges
Level 4 approx 5.0mil EHP knocking it to level 3 removes the benefits of military and industrial 4 upgrades until its either repped up or passively recharges
Level 3 approx 7.5mil EHP knocking it to level 2 removes the benefits of military and industrial 3 upgrades until its either repped up or passively recharges
Level 2 approx 10mil EHP knocking it to level 1 removes the benefits of military and industrial 2 upgrades until its either repped up or passively recharges
Level 1 - has reinforce timers - you are fighting for sov.
Edit: altering numbers as numbers are a little low |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
Took me a moment to think about that and then I concluded that it would be an improvement over the current system. |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:38:00 -
[9] - Quote
SmashTech wrote:Took me a moment to think about that and then I concluded that it would be an improvement over the current system.
10 BCs who do 400DPS would take 10minutes or so to knock a level 5 to level 4 and that would knock the number of sanctums/havens down in a good sec system.
1. Defend your space if you wish to make isk off of it.
2. Small gangs are worthwhile. |
Shivus Tao
Broski Enterprises
Elite Space Guild
100
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:40:00 -
[10] - Quote
Retooling the ihubs to be the core of system sovereignty is a good idea. It would also enable the addtion of constellation and regional command hubs for a proper feel of home systems.
|
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:44:00 -
[11] - Quote
Shivus Tao wrote:Retooling the ihubs to be the core of system sovereignty is a good idea. It would also enable the addtion of constellation and regional command hubs for a proper feel of home systems.
I've done some modelling on that. The problem I see is "Home System" = Blob Central.
One option I thought could have potential is: link the total EHP of ihubs across a constellation. When the combined constellation ihubs lose the equivalent EHP of a complete level 5 ihub a random ihub in the constellation goes off line. |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:47:00 -
[12] - Quote
It would always be "blob central" as you describe it because people are supposed to be living there. |
Lord Zim
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
222
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:50:00 -
[13] - Quote
That's fine. What you'd want is a SOV system that rewarded active defence, and gives a soft transition between empires. Not the hard wall we see now which is essentially a hard wall you either smash through one system at a time, or you just bounce off of, and means that the only way to do warfare is one fuckoff huge fleet vs another fuckoff huge fleet. No small incursion, no multiple systems strike, etc.
But you also want to make it progressively easier for the defender the closer to home you get. |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:53:00 -
[14] - Quote
Hey you can take those goodposts and go right back where you came from
This is Eve-O general discussion, that kind of riff-raff doesn't belong here. |
mkjkgkvk Melkan
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:57:00 -
[15] - Quote
Shivus Tao wrote:Retooling the ihubs to be the core of system sovereignty is a good idea. It would also enable the addtion of constellation and regional command hubs for a proper feel of home systems.
Yeah for sure, structures could face resistance penalties for jumps from hubs in some form or other, just to speed the whole damn thing along. dunno how this would affect small alliances with only 2-3 systems. what think? |
mkjkgkvk Melkan
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:58:00 -
[16] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:That's fine. What you'd want is a SOV system that rewarded active defence, and gives a soft transition between empires. Not the hard wall we see now which is essentially a hard wall you either smash through one system at a time, or you just bounce off of, and means that the only way to do warfare is one fuckoff huge fleet vs another fuckoff huge fleet. No small incursion, no multiple systems strike, etc.
But you also want to make it progressively easier for the defender the closer to home you get.
thisthisthis |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 00:03:00 -
[17] - Quote
SmashTech wrote:It would always be "blob central" as you describe it because people are supposed to be living there.
Yeah I understand that. The problem would be you guys would think:
Don't worry about I30- and 2O9G- let Evoke grind their way through, the constellation hub is JU-, just stack up 200 guys in there at all times and have the Cap fleet ready to jump from where ever they are stationed 2-K?
Amazing its the same as H-W but one for every constellation. |
Lord Zim
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
222
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 00:10:00 -
[18] - Quote
I don't see why it would have to be defined on a pr constellation basis. Why not just go back to the old system and have SOV be descriptive rather than presctiptive? If you want to turtle up in one system when you're attacked, fine, go ahead. Have fun living in ~one system~ then. I'm sure that'll be hella fun. is that not enough? Well, control more systems then. |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 00:14:00 -
[19] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:I don't see why it would have to be defined on a pr constellation basis. Why not just go back to the old system and have SOV be descriptive rather than presctiptive? If you want to turtle up in one system when you're attacked, fine, go ahead. Have fun living in ~one system~ then. I'm sure that'll be hella fun. is that not enough? Well, control more systems then.
I understand the concept. I can not picture it in reality. The old system was he who has most pos wins.
|
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 00:16:00 -
[20] - Quote
Sovreignity bubbles that grow for a certain period of time when you control the majority of outposts/planets in a system and takes control of systems when the bubble extends over them. Mostly passive and stops at other alliances borders. Much like Verite Renditions map.
No forcing people to grind as slaves in a system for sov and no shooting or anchroing structures bar outposts. Could involve PI and Dust 514. |
Lord Zim
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
222
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 00:17:00 -
[21] - Quote
Fairly certain that the system prior to that was, you control the systems you can keep military superiority over. Kind of like NPC null is now, only you can do more with it.
That would also be a lot more sandboxy in my mind than today's abortion of a SOV system, but I'm not sure we'll ever see that kind of system in conquerable space again. vOv |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 00:20:00 -
[22] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Fairly certain that the system prior to that was, you control the systems you can keep military superiority over. Kind of like NPC null is now, only you can do more with it.
That would also be a lot more sandboxy in my mind than today's abortion of a SOV system, but I'm not sure we'll ever see that kind of system in conquerable space again. vOv
Ah true. I agree not sure we will see that ever again, because how would we measure that in these heady days of 50 alliance titans on line at a single time.
|
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 00:52:00 -
[23] - Quote
"A sovereignty system that bases the difficulty of taking a system on the influence that its inhabitants exert over it?
That makes absolutely no sense, so we're not adding it."
--CCP |
Lord Zim
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
222
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 00:55:00 -
[24] - Quote
:smith: |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 01:00:00 -
[25] - Quote
:negative: |
Nikola Aivoras
Lionheart Mining and Manufacturing
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 01:12:00 -
[26] - Quote
SmashTech wrote:"A sovereignty system that bases the difficulty of taking a system on the influence that its inhabitants exert over it?
That makes absolutely no sense, so we're not adding it."
--CCP
Where did this come from?
|
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 01:12:00 -
[27] - Quote
I'm not sure if my untested ideas that I thought were good are being trolled into non existence by you two. |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 01:17:00 -
[28] - Quote
No, we're just incredibly bitter and jaded players. Your ideas are much better than the rubbish that passes for ideas around here normally. |
Vyl Vit
Cambio Enterprises
115
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 01:19:00 -
[29] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:I agree - originally, the winter expansion was supposed to be a nullsec revamp, which we didn't see much of.
Anyway -a lot of nice little changes along witha few bad ones were delivered, so I there's enough left to do for summer, as long as they don't start doing 1000$ spaceparbie-jeans for 18 months again...
This post epitomizes the holier than thou minority that speak with an imagined authority from a delusional database.
Horrible avatar, btw. You win the ugly contest by a mile. GJ.
To her it doesn't matter much.-á It's chasms have been leapt, and she leans upon the skepticism of her chosen fate. |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 01:27:00 -
[30] - Quote
Vyl Vit wrote:Large Collidable Object wrote:I agree - originally, the winter expansion was supposed to be a nullsec revamp, which we didn't see much of.
Anyway -a lot of nice little changes along witha few bad ones were delivered, so I there's enough left to do for summer, as long as they don't start doing 1000$ spaceparbie-jeans for 18 months again... This post epitomizes the holier than thou minority that speak with an imagined authority from a delusional database. Horrible avatar, btw. You win the ugly contest by a mile. GJ.
Your post epitomizes the off topic direct personal insults that the majority of these forums speak with. It is also contains undercurrents of self righteousness and thus strains of hypocrisy, the aroma is bitter but the body is supposed to be earthy but is merely vapid and there seems to an after taste of something... ...can't put my finger on it... |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 01:31:00 -
[31] - Quote
There it goes.
The after taste is unfulfilled loneliness. |
Shivus Tao
Broski Enterprises
Elite Space Guild
100
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 02:06:00 -
[32] - Quote
In expanding on the ideas presented here and the farms and fields idea proposed previously, I'm imagining a central regional hub that expands sovereignty at a fixed but up-gradable pace throughout the region. Constellation hubs speed up this process within their own constellation. Regional hubs also greatly improve the industrial base of the "core" systems at the cost of an increase in sec status. Constellation hubs also do this, but only in the system they're deployed in unless upgraded to spread to nearby systems. The fringe systems conversely decline in security status falling closer to -1.0 as pirates are displaced from the now civilized core systems. It would be possible for small gangs to get in through the militarized (read carebear) systems quickly and raid the industrial base of large slothful empires. This would also cause nulsec to be ever changing since security status would no longer be locked. It might suddenly be worthwhile for a small alliance to try and take a small pocket of uncontested currently garbage space. |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
442
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 02:34:00 -
[33] - Quote
SmashTech wrote:I'm burned out from shooting structures for two years.
Please design a sovereignty system that doesn't involve only timers and absolutely ******** amounts of EHP, thanks.
Figure out a way where DPS won't infinitely stack in EVE - and you won't get structures with large amounts of EHP.
No easy solutions there unless you change weapons so that every weapon that hits within an interval does less and less damage until the debris cloud fades, or the ionization from the previous weapon strike(s) fade. Which may be the only long-term solution.
The concept would be, divide time into 1 (3?) second intervals:
- First weapon that hits a particular target during the interval does 100% damage.
- Each additional strike does N% less damage then the previous strike.
But it would probably be a pain to calculate. |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 03:14:00 -
[34] - Quote
Or you could, you know, not have structures with that number of hitpoints in systems that nobody ever uses.
There should be penalties for holding space that you don't actually live in. It would certainly mold the borders of the map more closely to what the actual power of nullsec alliances is. |
Titania Hrothgar
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 03:38:00 -
[35] - Quote
do they shoot back in 0.0? They should. Have them have progressively more awesome offensive capabilities as the level goes up. Not in High Sec, but in 0.0 they should be able to blow up ships that intrude. It would take fleets to get in and take the system over.. The whole Tradewars effect if anyone here has played it.
Titania Hrothgar |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 03:41:00 -
[36] - Quote
Titania Hrothgar wrote:do they shoot back in 0.0? They should. Have them have progressively more awesome offensive capabilities as the level goes up. Not in High Sec, but in 0.0 they should be able to blow up ships that intrude. It would take fleets to get in and take the system over.. The whole Tradewars effect if anyone here has played it.
...I suppose it was only a matter of time before somebody posted something dumb in here.
No, IHUBs, TCUs, and SBUs do not fire back. |
Jita Alt666
632
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 06:30:00 -
[37] - Quote
SmashTech wrote:Titania Hrothgar wrote:do they shoot back in 0.0? They should. Have them have progressively more awesome offensive capabilities as the level goes up. Not in High Sec, but in 0.0 they should be able to blow up ships that intrude. It would take fleets to get in and take the system over.. The whole Tradewars effect if anyone here has played it. ...I suppose it was only a matter of time before somebody posted something dumb in here. No, IHUBs, TCUs, and SBUs do not fire back.
And it would make things much worse if they did.
|
Valei Khurelem
Khurelem Corporation
3
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 07:17:00 -
[38] - Quote
I know I'm going to get shot at for this, but I don't think there is anything actually wrong with the current sovereignty system, what is obviously wrong that I've heard so many people complain about is the fact you have to sit for hours blasting away at the structures like they're a Jita monument.
I would actually suggest that maybe a serious nerfing of their HP would be suitable, maybe if you made it the health of a Titan? or something a bit less? I don't know the exact numbers I'm afraid, I haven't had the chance to play 0.0 properly because of all the gate campers. |
yumike
Eve of Madness
15
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 07:25:00 -
[39] - Quote
One of the thing's i've always thought should be required, To discourage the large blobness and alliances 'knocking over' the little guy that may just be trying to start out, is dynamic costs to owning systems, and in order to completely destroy the hostile cpu - let it hit 1hp and then require that the hostile fleet anchor a tcu to finish it off & pay all bills related.
A sov system that it's strength is based on the current people in the system, rather then a structure that is anchorable.
E.g I had 200 people in the system all day, You had 9 for half an hour sov is nowhere near contested however if you dropped 15 people roaming our border in the north and theres usually only 1-2 of us there sov's weakened a bit in the system, if this persists for hours/days/weeks then eventually itll be lost without a shot fired (Oh well, they obviously weren't using the space with only one person there anyway. and that's being generous to alot of systems.)
It's not a perfect system, Granted I haven't put a whole ton of thought into it but in the hopes of:
- Making sure people want the space if they are evicting the tenants, Not just doing it because they aren't on a blue list - give them other means of disturbance to entertain this sort of sov warfare.
- Encourage the space to be used
- Discourage mega alliances/Coalitions from owning everything in null. (You want to evict that 150man alliance that anchored a tcu last week? Fine but your paying for that system and it's costing you an extra 10bil/month because you aren't even using the systems that you currently own.)
The other perk's I can think of:
If you are decoupling sov at least partially from the tcu itself, less reliance on shooting it. Maybe still a possibility for a 'quick method' way if the enemy isn't around but if you are being pushed out of a system day after day by roaming gangs or forces from another alliance, then every DT the tcu loses health/resists.
You wouldn't CTA because a gang of 15 is poking a system in the north and might give you a little fight (well okay, you might.) But instead probably a slightly larger gang will be formed up after the intel comes in, no need to start dropping supercaps because a bc gang is camping a gate.
Obviously, the numbers I used are rubbish (Though it should be enough to discourage larger alliances from "owning" a region whilst only owning two systems inside it).
Maybe the entire idea is rubbish, I'm sure no matter what you do some people will - regardless i'd be very interested to hear peoples thoughts.
tl;dr fix sov by making it more about what you do in a system, and who's there rather then making it about an anchorable structure to shoot at. |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
46
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 11:13:00 -
[40] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:I know I'm going to get shot at for this, but I don't think there is anything actually wrong with the current sovereignty system, what is obviously wrong that I've heard so many people complain about is the fact you have to sit for hours blasting away at the structures like they're a Jita monument.
I would actually suggest that maybe a serious nerfing of their HP would be suitable, maybe if you made it the health of a Titan? or something a bit less? I don't know the exact numbers I'm afraid, I haven't had the chance to play 0.0 properly because of all the gate campers.
If you've never had "the chance to play 0.0 properly" (because of all the gatecamps? oh lawdy) then you probably shouldn't be commenting on what's wrong with it or how to fix it. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
177
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 11:24:00 -
[41] - Quote
What has your much vaunted bought-and-paid-for CSM been doing after they were kicked out of Iceland post emergency back-rub?
Wasn't the intention of getting a 100% null-monkey council to improve life in null .. specifically to get Dominion revisited and Sanctum faucet reopened?
But I must admit, it is good to see that even the bigger entities (well, Goon Ego's are big at any rate  ) are starting to get annoyed with the broken system they are forced to live with .. a little late but at least you made it! |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
46
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 11:31:00 -
[42] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:What has your much vaunted bought-and-paid-for CSM been doing after they were kicked out of Iceland post emergency back-rub? Wasn't the intention of getting a 100% null-monkey council to improve life in null .. specifically to get Dominion revisited and Sanctum faucet reopened? But I must admit, it is good to see that even the bigger entities (well, Goon Ego's are big at any rate ) are starting to get annoyed with the broken system they are forced to live with .. a little late but at least you made it!
Remember how Crucible was a pony more and a kick in the balls less than Incarna? You can thank the CSM for that. CCP still has to fix most of the nullsec problems and there's really not much the CSM can do to force them to do that. |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
47
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 13:23:00 -
[43] - Quote
I know for a fact that CCP will implement player ideas if they are sound. Consider, for example, PI taxes. Originally CCP was going to continue using the fantasy numbers that existed back when PI goods were sold by NPCs. Then a player named pmchem came along, wrote out some fancy schmancy math, and pointed out to CCP that the notion of the tax was pointless at the current base levels and that POCOs could almost never pay for themselves without a hundred people using the planet. And so CCP changed the tax, to almost exactly what he suggested. |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P
C C P Alliance
295
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 13:29:00 -
[44] - Quote
Off topic posts removed. Please stay on topic, thank you.
Moved from General Discussion.
CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
Lord Zim
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
223
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 13:32:00 -
[45] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:What has your much vaunted bought-and-paid-for CSM been doing after they were kicked out of Iceland post emergency back-rub? Wasn't the intention of getting a 100% null-monkey council to improve life in null .. specifically to get Dominion revisited and Sanctum faucet reopened? But I must admit, it is good to see that even the bigger entities (well, Goon Ego's are big at any rate ) are starting to get annoyed with the broken system they are forced to live with .. a little late but at least you made it!
First of all, from my perspective (i.e. someone who's in goons, but not all that high up in the hierarchy, nor very close to the CSM itself), what the CSM (and indeed the entire playerbase as a whole) has had to contend with the last 2 years has been to drag CCP, kicking and screaming, back to actually developing EVE. Crucible was, what, 3-4 months work, if that? All they've been able to do has been to go "oh **** oh **** oh **** EVE is in trouble we must do something!", and then start fixing a lot of the lower hanging fruits such as adding the display of JBs to the ingame map, update the PI interface (although, believe me, there's still a fucktonne of work still to be done to make the whole PI setup/modification UI even remotely good, but at least the export/import UI isn't sucking horsedicks on a rack anymore.
Whether this change in priorities have come because of user unsubscription rates, bad press, CSM punching them in the face on the iceland meetings, I literally couldn't give less of a flying ****, the main thing is that they have changed priorities. It probably would've taken longer if the bad press hadn't been whipped up, it probably would've taken longer if unsubscriptions hadn't been as dramatic etc etc etc, whatever. We have CCP back on EVE, and that's the important thing.
As to getting null improved, there's been a ton of small things making life in null a little bit better in crucible, JBs using standings etc so we won't have to type in the damn passwords every time for example, anoms are either already slightly upadjusted again or will be soon, various ship balancing etc, and probably a lot of other niggly little things that I can't be arsed to remember offhand. For a few months' work, I'm mostly happy with that progress. I'm hoping that the next expansion will be a much more focused, and much less panicky, expansion, where they can sit down and look at exactly how to make nullsec come alive with strife and murdering again.
The current setup of bringing the biggest blob you can into a system every second day, with 8 hours warning, isn't just something we've been "annoyed with" the last few months, it's something probably all of null (or at least I hope so, because it is ****) has been annoyed with for well over a year. There's absolutely no dynamism in it, no way to gradually grind down a bunch of systems, it's smash one system at a time and move on to the next. And if CCP were to concentrate on just one thing for the next expansion, I would say that this problem should be the one thing to focus on. Anything else is, to me, extras. If they do their job well in that regard and make null warfare much more dynamic than it is now, I probably wouldn't mind if they focused wholly on hisec/lowsec/faction warfare/whatever for the next few expansions. |
SmashTech
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
47
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 13:58:00 -
[46] - Quote
Oh, joy, it's been moved to F&I. Well, thread, so long, and thanks for all the fish.
R.I.P. Smashtech's thread |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |