EVE Search - Please reduce the number of SOV timers

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Please reduce the number of SOV timers

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Aiwha Infinite Point Violence of Action. 1031	Posted - 2016.04.02 07:29:53 - [361] - Quote Xeno Szenn wrote: Rain6637 wrote: now jump up and down and celebrate proper. Overall I'm hoping for both sides this drags on for 5 to 6 years think of all of the fun content and changes it would brinig to the game. this has been a great discussion on mechanics though and I hope to see everyone on grid and space. That would put 7 trillion isk in our pocket. I'm down. Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Hawk Aulmais EXPCS Corp SpaceMonkey's Alliance 2	Posted - 2016.04.02 08:24:08 - [362] - Quote Aiwha wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: Mario Putzo wrote: Hawk Aulmais wrote: So #ccp we ran the numbers and in the past 14 days SMA has had to deal with ~200 hacking attempts. How many of these resulted in timers idk. Just goes to show its easier to attack than to defend. Can't save every system just due to the geography of some areas when 20 hackers are hitting at once. Hold less space then. Its super simple. Not that simple, they'd still hit every node they can resulting in likely the same amount of hacking attempts. It's been said multiple times over, but the fact hat we are still holding our space against a significantly larger number of enemies shows that we aren't overextended, but that still doesn't mean the mechanics we're all forced to deal with don't suck. You've abandoned more than half your space... sma has held the same amount of space. stop making it about "you have too much space" and just admit MBC is using the current meta to try and kill the cfc. yes we have pulled back since all of eve is pushing on us. but hey, GL holding all the "sov" you took since you will be faced with the same timer hell.
Tappits north eastern swat Pandemic Legion 208	Posted - 2016.04.02 08:46:00 - [363] - Quote Gloom skull Dethahal wrote: I will add my voice to the many. Please, please reduce the number of sov vulnerability timers. Every day we log in, that's all we do is defend space. There's no time for anything else. I work and have a family life to enjoy. At least with a paying job you get two days off. Take these vulnerability timers down to 3 days a week. You'd developers must think there are hundreds of thousands of people playing this game. That or that we're all unemployed with nothing better to do. Reduce the timers for goodness sake. Thanks 1: Have less sov 2: Don't be at war 3: Have less sov Like really you have like 40 sov systems... why on earth do you need 40 sov systems for an alliance that has ~150 online players at any one time?
Darek Castigatus Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel 704	Posted - 2016.04.02 14:07:16 - [364] - Quote Hawk Aulmais wrote: Aiwha wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: Mario Putzo wrote: Hawk Aulmais wrote: So #ccp we ran the numbers and in the past 14 days SMA has had to deal with ~200 hacking attempts. How many of these resulted in timers idk. Just goes to show its easier to attack than to defend. Can't save every system just due to the geography of some areas when 20 hackers are hitting at once. Hold less space then. Its super simple. Not that simple, they'd still hit every node they can resulting in likely the same amount of hacking attempts. It's been said multiple times over, but the fact hat we are still holding our space against a significantly larger number of enemies shows that we aren't overextended, but that still doesn't mean the mechanics we're all forced to deal with don't suck. You've abandoned more than half your space... sma has held the same amount of space. stop making it about "you have too much space" and just admit MBC is using the current meta to try and kill the cfc. yes we have pulled back since all of eve is pushing on us. but hey, GL holding all the "sov" you took since you will be faced with the same timer hell. Thats the beauty of a coalition of people with widely differeing ideas what they want from the campaign. People who want sov will take it, those who dont will just turn up for the fights like we've been doing all the time. Im going to say again whats been said elsewhere - you have tons of defensive timers because you still held to the dominion era thinking of 'lets own a load of sov we dont need' even after you ditched a lot of it due to new mechanics. Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin you're welcome
Aiwha Infinite Point Violence of Action. 1031	Posted - 2016.04.02 16:39:54 - [365] - Quote Hawk Aulmais wrote: Aiwha wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: Mario Putzo wrote: Hawk Aulmais wrote: So #ccp we ran the numbers and in the past 14 days SMA has had to deal with ~200 hacking attempts. How many of these resulted in timers idk. Just goes to show its easier to attack than to defend. Can't save every system just due to the geography of some areas when 20 hackers are hitting at once. Hold less space then. Its super simple. Not that simple, they'd still hit every node they can resulting in likely the same amount of hacking attempts. It's been said multiple times over, but the fact hat we are still holding our space against a significantly larger number of enemies shows that we aren't overextended, but that still doesn't mean the mechanics we're all forced to deal with don't suck. You've abandoned more than half your space... sma has held the same amount of space. stop making it about "you have too much space" and just admit MBC is using the current meta to try and kill the cfc. yes we have pulled back since all of eve is pushing on us. but hey, GL holding all the "sov" you took since you will be faced with the same timer hell. We don't want the space. We just don't want you living in it. Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7445	Posted - 2016.04.03 09:18:48 - [366] - Quote Darek Castigatus wrote: Thats the beauty of a coalition of people with widely differeing ideas what they want from the campaign. People who want sov will take it, those who dont will just turn up for the fights like we've been doing all the time. Im going to say again whats been said elsewhere - you have tons of defensive timers because you still held to the dominion era thinking of 'lets own a load of sov we dont need' even after you ditched a lot of it due to new mechanics. And I'm going to say again what's been said in this very thread. You're wrong. If we had less space we'd just have more timers in that space instead on in border space. Setting up timers is incredibly easy which is why MBC are doing in then cheering continuously because it's how they pretend they are achieving something. If we had too much space, we wouldn't be able to defend it like we have been. Additionally the russian groups have one tenth the number of players per system, so if anyone's overstretched it's certainly not us. The real problem here is that you're unwilling to actually be honest about it so you just chant the party line. If one day you choose to settle down in some space you'll suddenly realise we were right all along and you'll be back here asking why you have to go deal with timers every day when you just want to play a game for entertainment. The bit to watch is when this war is over. See it's only fun because you have two large groups of people going nuts at each other (just like dominion sov pushed for) except now the mechanics are even boring but people put up with them to achieve the goals. Once one side wins and there's no longer these massive battles, sub numbers are going to drop like a rock because nobody wants to actually deal with the fozziesov mechanics for the sake of it, they are just a means to an end. Once the big war was over dominion mechanics mean people could enjoy their victory, but now since solo players can come and set up timers it just means you get the joy of going back to dealing with timers and zero fights for eternity. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7445	Posted - 2016.04.03 09:23:12 - [367] - Quote Aiwha wrote: We don't want the space. We just don't want you living in it. Which isn't what the sov mechanics are designed to facilitate. It's an ownership mechanics and you should need to commit to it because you actually want it, not just be able to effectively gank space. See you like it because you get to use it against goons, but remember the same mechanics are what work for all players, so nothing stops people just picking any old target and going "You don't have your space anymore, have fun dealing with bad mechanics trying to defend it and laser it back". The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Aiwha Infinite Point Violence of Action. 1034	Posted - 2016.04.03 10:00:31 - [368] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Aiwha wrote: We don't want the space. We just don't want you living in it. Which isn't what the sov mechanics are designed to facilitate. It's an ownership mechanics and you should need to commit to it because you actually want it, not just be able to effectively gank space. See you like it because you get to use it against goons, but remember the same mechanics are what work for all players, so nothing stops people just picking any old target and going "You don't have your space anymore, have fun dealing with bad mechanics trying to defend it and laser it back". If you want to hold space, you have to attack it first. We're just attacking it and making it inhospitable for you to live there. Because your leadership has pissed off so many people to the point where they just want to burn it down. See, how it works for normal people is that you have space to make money, so if you take space, you have to use it to make money. Since you pissed off IWI, we can literally just burn your space and not have to worry about the isk thanks to 1ronbank and his merry band of space misers. Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7445	Posted - 2016.04.03 11:03:25 - [369] - Quote Aiwha wrote: If you want to hold space, you have to attack it first. We're just attacking it and making it inhospitable for you to live there. Because your leadership has pissed off so many people to the point where they just want to burn it down. Cry more. The only reason our leadership has pissed people off is because they've managed to accomplish something you guys would have no hope of. The fact that you guys are so delusional that you are acting like you've already won makes it all the more amusing. The only bad thing about the entire war is that one of the mechanics we have to deal with consists entirely of mining structures and so is boring. If by some miracle you guys actually manage to stay together long enough to win, all you have to look forward to is us moving to NPC space then using the exact same advantage you currently enjoy to stop over everyone remotely nearby. Aiwha wrote: See, how it works for normal people is that you have space to make money, so if you take space, you have to use it to make money. Since you pissed off IWI, we can literally just burn your space and not have to worry about the isk thanks to 1ronbank and his merry band of space misers. Honestly, the fact that an RMT scam machine is pouring ISK handed to them by dumb people into providing me content instead of into illicit ISK sales just makes me giddy. I know the sad truth is that eventually he'll stop and go back to selling ISK for cash full time, but until then it kinda feels like we're helping the game by redistributing this wealth legitimately. You're welcome EVE. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Aiwha Infinite Point Violence of Action. 1034	Posted - 2016.04.03 11:35:28 - [370] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Aiwha wrote: If you want to hold space, you have to attack it first. We're just attacking it and making it inhospitable for you to live there. Because your leadership has pissed off so many people to the point where they just want to burn it down. Cry more. The only reason our leadership has pissed people off is because they've managed to accomplish something you guys would have no hope of. The fact that you guys are so delusional that you are acting like you've already won makes it all the more amusing. The only bad thing about the entire war is that one of the mechanics we have to deal with consists entirely of mining structures and so is boring. If by some miracle you guys actually manage to stay together long enough to win, all you have to look forward to is us moving to NPC space then using the exact same advantage you currently enjoy to stop over everyone remotely nearby. Aiwha wrote: See, how it works for normal people is that you have space to make money, so if you take space, you have to use it to make money. Since you pissed off IWI, we can literally just burn your space and not have to worry about the isk thanks to 1ronbank and his merry band of space misers. Honestly, the fact that an RMT scam machine is pouring ISK handed to them by dumb people into providing me content instead of into illicit ISK sales just makes me giddy. I know the sad truth is that eventually he'll stop and go back to selling ISK for cash full time, but until then it kinda feels like we're helping the game by redistributing this wealth legitimately. You're welcome EVE. Being a wuss and bluing all your neighbors so you can PVE all day is a great accomplishment? That's highsec. You're bragging about living in highsec. If you love the content so much, why are you whining about having to defend your space? Sanity is fun leaving the body.

Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7445	Posted - 2016.04.03 13:25:31 - [371] - Quote Aiwha wrote: Being a wuss and bluing all your neighbors so you can PVE all day is a great accomplishment? That's highsec. You're bragging about living in highsec. I don't PVE, but nice try. I like the version of highsec where there's continuous daily raids from multiple groups for several years and no concord to guarantee your safety. Aiwha wrote: If you love the content so much, why are you whining about having to defend your space? Comprehension not your thing huh? Simply put, shooting ships is fun, firing mining lasers at structures is not. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
ArmyOfMe Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition 591	Posted - 2016.04.03 13:32:02 - [372] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Again why should you not have to defend your space if it only takes 1 ship to attack then it only takes 1 ship to defend. Why should every single player of any size be able to force a defensive response? [/quote] Its not like you guys dont form blobs to kill roamers anyways.... Does the new sov system suck? yes, even i think so, but its still nice to see smaller alliances be able to disrupt bigger ones. ArmyOfMe wrote: 1) If you get bumped then that webber wont do anything. baltec1 wrote: We use the exact same tactic for titans and they enter warp instantly.
ArmyOfMe Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition 591	Posted - 2016.04.03 13:35:28 - [373] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Xeno Szenn wrote: ItGÇÖs a buff for the defender because now they only have to worry about being attacked a few hours a day instead of every second of the day. Except that was never the case, since you had timers for sov in the old system. You actually know what the old system entailed, right? Depends on which of the sov sytstems you are reffering to, you do know that, right? ArmyOfMe wrote: 1) If you get bumped then that webber wont do anything. baltec1 wrote: We use the exact same tactic for titans and they enter warp instantly.
March rabbit Federal Defense Union 1718	Posted - 2016.04.03 13:47:59 - [374] - Quote Aiwha wrote: If you love the content so much, why are you whining about having to defend your space? Man, you are making Lucas (and other goon members in this thread) look really better than you. Is that really what are you trying to achieve? Even me (hater for goons for YEARS and person who left 2 good alliances just because they joined goon side) find myself agreeing with their points. The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7445	Posted - 2016.04.03 14:09:00 - [375] - Quote ArmyOfMe wrote: Does the new sov system suck? yes, even i think so, but its still nice to see smaller alliances be able to disrupt bigger ones. Which I agree with, but the smaller alliances should still have to commit something to it. ArmyOfMe wrote: Depends on which of the sov sytstems you are reffering to, you do know that, right? In context he's saying it's a buff over the previous system, not the original hacked together sov system. [quote=ArmyOfMe]ummmm, you do realise the irony of this one right? No, not really. I want good, entertaining mechanics in place, so that people who want big groups can play in big groups, people who want small groups can play in small groups and people who want solo can play solo and there's a good mix of interaction between all of them. But what many people want from fozziesov is a way for small groups to stomp all over big groups until big groups don't exist. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Eli Apol Definitely a nullsec alt 553	Posted - 2016.04.03 14:16:47 - [376] - Quote When a coalition of members outnumbers the CFC I don't think that's a small group stomping on a big group. It's a big group stomping on a big group. but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Leonid Ragulin The Scope Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2016.04.03 14:36:24 - [377] - Quote I think the problem here is the number of timers that can co-exist. 3 timers per system, around 6 systems per constellation, that means each system can have sites for 18 different timers. What is happening is every timer is getting troll-reinforced, and the attackers are only following through with a few at a time. Please dont just throw hate on CFC/Imperium, anyone with a brain knows that as soon as they lose Branch, Tenal and Tribute, every single timer in those systems will be troll-reinforced 23/7 by them and the annoyance will be on the other side. As a solution, the number of timers needs to go down, and the possibility of multiple alliances owning structures in the same system needs to go. TCU's as a seperate entity are just a pointless mechanic. So: 1) Go back to the system where the ihub acts as a buffer to sov. Until you kill the ihub, you cant reinforce other structures in the system (apart from station services, that mechanic stays the same) 2) The station/outpost and the tcu cannot coexist. In systems where both exist, the tcu blows up, and the ownership of the station determines who has sov. In non-station systems, the tcu determines sov, and if the sov owner builds an outpost, the tcu blows up. So, the new mechanic to capture a system is either: reinforce ihub > kill ihub > reinforce station > freeport station > win freeport capture event, or reinforce ihub > kill ihub >reinforce tcu > kill tcu > online own tcu When stations are got rid of and non-soveriegn citadels become the only dockables, the owner of the old station gets a TCU back and TCUs become the only final soveriegnty structure. We then get a nice split - entosis is for soverignty, guns are for structures.
Aiwha Infinite Point Violence of Action. 1036	Posted - 2016.04.03 14:45:46 - [378] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Aiwha wrote: Being a wuss and bluing all your neighbors so you can PVE all day is a great accomplishment? That's highsec. You're bragging about living in highsec. I don't PVE, but nice try. I like the version of highsec where there's continuous daily raids from multiple groups for several years and no concord to guarantee your safety. Aiwha wrote: If you love the content so much, why are you whining about having to defend your space? Comprehension not your thing huh? Simply put, shooting ships is fun, firing mining lasers at structures is not. Oh, so that's why you guys like to pve so much. Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7445	Posted - 2016.04.03 19:32:11 - [379] - Quote Eli Apol wrote: When a coalition of members outnumbers the CFC I don't think that's a small group stomping on a big group. It's a big group stomping on a big group. But this thread wasn't put up talking about the big group, it was talking about the small groups and how easy and low risk it is for an aggressor regardless of size. Big group vs big group is the natural evolution of that with the big aggressor able to press that advantage. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Andski GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 11565	Posted - 2016.04.03 20:04:40 - [380] - Quote The point of the new sov system is to reduce single-point conflicts. That goal was accomplished. Twitter: @EVEAndski "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -á-á - Abrazzar

Aiwha Infinite Point Violence of Action. 1044	Posted - 2016.04.03 21:00:09 - [381] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Eli Apol wrote: When a coalition of members outnumbers the CFC I don't think that's a small group stomping on a big group. It's a big group stomping on a big group. But this thread wasn't put up talking about the big group, it was talking about the small groups and how easy and low risk it is for an aggressor regardless of size. Big group vs big group is the natural evolution of that with the big aggressor able to press that advantage. Its plenty risky. Its also risky to own space. Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7445	Posted - 2016.04.03 22:48:07 - [382] - Quote Aiwha wrote: Its plenty risky. Its also risky to own space. HAHAHAHA. So it's plenty risky to stick an entosis link on a disposable ship and fire it at a structure? Stop being terrible. Seriously guy, if you can't see the clear difference in what people have to put on the line between attackers and defenders it's because you don't want to. Anyone even remotely objective can see where the problem lies, and the funny part is that one day you'll probably try to hold sov and you'll be right back here with the exact same problems. What's becoming clear to most people now is that it's pretty much the best idea to live in lowsec or npc nullsec bordering sov space and use sov casually rather than actually owning it and living directly in it. The whole concept of ownership and belonging has been chucked. This is why the current war has no real endgame. Even if we lose the majority of our space there's nothing stopping us doing exactly what MBC are doing then nobody is owning it, and what we end up with is two massive coalitions fighting each other perpetually and we've back to blob vs blob. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Hawke Frost 18	Posted - 2016.04.03 23:15:42 - [383] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Aiwha wrote: Its plenty risky. Its also risky to own space. HAHAHAHA. So it's plenty risky to stick an entosis link on a disposable ship and fire it at a structure? Stop being terrible. Seriously guy, if you can't see the clear difference in what people have to put on the line between attackers and defenders it's because you don't want to. Anyone even remotely objective can see where the problem lies, and the funny part is that one day you'll probably try to hold sov and you'll be right back here with the exact same problems. What's becoming clear to most people now is that it's pretty much the best idea to live in lowsec or npc nullsec bordering sov space and use sov casually rather than actually owning it and living directly in it. The whole concept of ownership and belonging has been chucked. This is why the current war has no real endgame. Even if we lose the majority of our space there's nothing stopping us doing exactly what MBC are doing then nobody is owning it, and what we end up with is two massive coalitions fighting each other perpetually and we've back to blob vs blob. Feel free to leave 0.0
Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 33488	Posted - 2016.04.03 23:26:11 - [384] - Quote oh **** andski is back Help, I can't download EVE President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7445	Posted - 2016.04.03 23:28:49 - [385] - Quote Hawke Frost wrote: Feel free to leave 0.0 I also feel free to stay in 0.0 and have an opinion about it, generic NPC alt. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Xeno Szenn Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 30	Posted - 2016.04.03 23:46:46 - [386] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Aiwha wrote: Its plenty risky. Its also risky to own space. HAHAHAHA. So it's plenty risky to stick an entosis link on a disposable ship and fire it at a structure? Stop being terrible. Seriously guy, if you can't see the clear difference in what people have to put on the line between attackers and defenders it's because you don't want to. Anyone even remotely objective can see where the problem lies, and the funny part is that one day you'll probably try to hold sov and you'll be right back here with the exact same problems. What's becoming clear to most people now is that it's pretty much the best idea to live in lowsec or npc nullsec bordering sov space and use sov casually rather than actually owning it and living directly in it. The whole concept of ownership and belonging has been chucked. This is why the current war has no real endgame. Even if we lose the majority of our space there's nothing stopping us doing exactly what MBC are doing then nobody is owning it, and what we end up with is two massive coalitions fighting each other perpetually and we've back to blob vs blob. Nothing wrong with a good long blop vs blop fight with tons of tidi and nothing wrong with small skirmish over to large fights over sov. I have nothing against the imperium but this war is fun and good for the game. WarGÇÖs draw people into eve and brings people back to fight them. I honestly hope we have a war thatGÇÖs last for years like the Mattani says it well be because that will make the game interesting and fun to play. The sov mechanic system can only really be used ageist you if you care about sov. A lot of people seem to care about sov while others donGÇÖt if people dint care about sov and the defenders do it will always be in the attackerGÇÖs favor. The question will always come down to what is the greater power. The power to create and build or the power to destroy. What do people want to do in this game and how do they want to play. When this started the question and discussion was about sov harassment and the mechanics that are applied to that. This war has changed and evolved now sov mechanics can be used to cause player burnout as the Mattani said on his fireside chat is a desirable outcome. To quote him psyop or psychological warfare is something that the Imperium specialize in. We can look at all these mechanics and see if fozzie sov works or doesnGÇÖt work after the fightingGÇÖs over. Fozzie sov seemed to desire to make a city state type of null sec where lots of groups owned and held sov. The old system meant only a few powerful groups could hold sov. What will happen when everything settles who knows. Will it go back to the way it was before with the Imperium owning half of sov null. Will Anyone hold sov, or will lots of groups hold sov? I donGÇÖt have an answer to that. The current mechanics can be used just as much against the attacker by vulnerability windows as it does in the attackerGÇÖs favor. AS you pointed out it takes a lot of effort to constantly monitor your sov and protect it from an attacker. So far IGÇÖve noticed that your staging systems were untouched until this became a much bigger fight then it was when it was waffles, horde, and Tishu fighting you. Your main staging system was safe and easily held. The sov mechanics no matter how you change them will always boil down to a war of attrition. Space could be taken and lost but as long as people keep fighting and their war chest are fully stoked and able to keep the fight going itGÇÖs going to boil down to player numbers and motivation. The question is how motivated are you to defend and how motivated are we to attack. ItGÇÖs all going to boil down to will power and motivation. Honestly for us that are just playing the game it should be fun for both sides. For the people who build and maintain alliances and corps it could be a lot more stressful. The citadels and capital changes could make this conflict and entosis game mechanics even more interesting. How will all that effect sov mechanics and the creation or destruction of fortressGÇÖs I donGÇÖt know but I look forward to seeing it. Will everyone live in low sec? That is a possibility. Is sov doomed who knows it could be. I don;t think its the ned of sov ownership though but only time well tell.
Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 33488	Posted - 2016.04.04 00:05:41 - [387] - Quote Are you honestly that clueless about what we're doing or is that just the weakest jedi mind trick I've ever seen. Help, I can't download EVE President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 33488	Posted - 2016.04.04 00:07:44 - [388] - Quote Would you mind if I explained what we're doing to you in plain english Help, I can't download EVE President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Eli Apol Definitely a nullsec alt 556	Posted - 2016.04.04 00:14:50 - [389] - Quote Playing cards? but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Sentamon Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 2339	Posted - 2016.04.04 00:16:04 - [390] - Quote Is it time for CCP to save the goons again? It should be almost time soon. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.