Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Moghydin
Confederation of Red Moon Red Moon Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 08:09:00 -
[91]
Some interesting ideas here. Not a big fan of low sec. myself, I think nonetheless that those ideas would give some meaning to the low sec space. Right now it's just a mostly empty buffer zone, with no rewards and a few gatecamps here and there.
Press alt+F4 to reduce lag |
Lagar
Caldari Core Domination
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:30:00 -
[92]
i am for all ideas but the one with the fog of war. beceause then you constantly have to get info on a sertan radius of space around and ignore the rest..
I think this one can generate more lag than it's worth tbh
but otherwise i realy have to agree.. i know peeps thought it was hard the first time they went there but now i actualy think that it could use an increased threat level.. infact i'd actualy like parts of 0.0 space to start go negative value.. meaning that for example -0.5 will have more larger ships around ex capital ships more BS's and so on. and have better belts as a compensation altho logicly there have to be a limit.. i mean who would like to enter a -10.0 system where the gate is camped by 3 titans and 4 motherships? :)
|
Jack O'Lope
This Space 4 Rent
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:35:00 -
[93]
/signed
CCP, give this man a job.
|
Verone
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:39:00 -
[94]
This thread of ideas earns :
out of
For pure awesomeness tbh.
Some really creative suggestions in there.
>>> TRIBUTE TO A FALLEN WINGMAN <<<
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 13:29:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Verone
This thread of ideas earns :
out of
For pure awesomeness tbh.
Some really creative suggestions in there.
Yeh I got a post from Verone in my thread! And 6 's.
Originally by: Jack O'Lope /signed
CCP, give this man a job.
This would be handy as Im currently jobless - will work for peanuts.
Originally by: Lagar i am for all ideas but the one with the fog of war. beceause then you constantly have to get info on a sertan radius of space around and ignore the rest..
I think this one can generate more lag than it's worth tbh
but otherwise i realy have to agree.. i know peeps thought it was hard the first time they went there but now i actualy think that it could use an increased threat level.. infact i'd actualy like parts of 0.0 space to start go negative value.. meaning that for example -0.5 will have more larger ships around ex capital ships more BS's and so on. and have better belts as a compensation altho logicly there have to be a limit.. i mean who would like to enter a -10.0 system where the gate is camped by 3 titans and 4 motherships? :)
Hmm, Im not sure about the lag aspect, won't you be loading less information as the server would only need to send data once your range value equalls that of another player??
One interesting idea posted (not mine, but it sounds kinda neat) are npc warp 'wirlpools' that pull you into a deadspace. Maybe that kind of phenomenom is more prevalent as the security of a system weakens?
Thx for the comments
C.
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
kittykatkat
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 22:54:00 -
[96]
Cool ideas.
|
Mr Bodacious
mUfFiN fAcToRy
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 23:08:00 -
[97]
Edited by: Mr Bodacious on 25/10/2007 23:09:34 Docking without 'docking'. Awesome. However, I agree that being able to refit in these stations is a bad idea, simply because you could carry alt fits in your cargo, and change up real fast based on who you're fighting.
The only way I think that it would work, is if the ruined stations were on the overview once you got close enough, but you could be attacked while docked. (You do this to NPC ships in missions, why cant you do it to other players?)
All other ideas get a 10/10, well thought-out and NEEDS TO BE IMPLEMENTED ASAP.
I started out this game wanting to be a smuggler, only to find out its not viable. My vote goes to make smuggling a real profession! GOGOGO!
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 23:19:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Mr Bodacious Edited by: Mr Bodacious on 25/10/2007 23:09:34 Docking without 'docking'. Awesome. However, I agree that being able to refit in these stations is a bad idea, simply because you could carry alt fits in your cargo, and change up real fast based on who you're fighting.
The only way I think that it would work, is if the ruined stations were on the overview once you got close enough, but you could be attacked while docked. (You do this to NPC ships in missions, why cant you do it to other players?)
All other ideas get a 10/10, well thought-out and NEEDS TO BE IMPLEMENTED ASAP.
I started out this game wanting to be a smuggler, only to find out its not viable. My vote goes to make smuggling a real profession! GOGOGO!
The docked-but not-docked term I use is to 'tether' your ship to a structure. A simple implementation is that while tetherd your ships cap is zeroed.
So lets say youre attacked near a structure like a ruined station 'ah ha!' you think facing your caldari foe - time for some anti-caldari EW!!' sadly upon tethering your cap drops to 0 and while fitting said modules your reduced to so much ash. A small 'untethering' delay to module activation would prevent the nimble fingered from doing a fast swap and cap inj job.
(Totally unrelated to this thread - but has anyone given any consideration to how many 'abandoned' drones are going to be about after the patch?
Why not swap the 'abandon' command for a 'kamikaze' command allowing you to fling your drones micro-missile style at your target for an extra dps 'oompf'. Would make sense in a 'drone wave attack' theme. Just a random thought that one.)
C
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Sole Trader
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 22:20:00 -
[99]
Love ideas in this thread (esp low sec black market) I'm sure CCP could work on this to make it balanced. Fog of war sounds interesting also. Would like to see these ideas or something similar at least considered, would definitely make low sec a different and more rewarding place to play the game.
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 02:43:00 -
[100]
Low Sec Idea - now with added smuggling!
Ok, before I add this post this addition to my overal concept of a "neo Low Sec" I stress that Im aware that smugglers in Eve exist in a wide variety of forms. I hope my idea here appeals to them (feed back appreciated).
However smuggling is not exactly endemic even though its a activity many would wish to dip into. Sadly the current mechanics are a bit 'bland' and few will have experienced them. Onto the idea then:
Firstly all Black Market items have a 'prohibited rating' indicating their level of illegality within Empire. In simple terms how hard are the authorities looking for a prohibited item?
This prohibited rating (PR) ranges from 0 to 50 per unit. e.g a single unit of drop booster has a PR of 1.
The chance of a CONCORD detection sweep equals the systems Sec Status x 100 / 2 (e.g .06 system = 30% of detection) plus the 'PR / 10' of your ships cargo hold. So 50 units of drop in 0.6 system = 35% chance of detection.
CONCORD detection sweeps are made when you reach a gate or station and occur at a rate of 1 sweep every 5 minutes (no hanging around dealers!). Any request to dock in high sec immediately incurs a sweep.
If you are found in possesion of contraband goods, they are removed from your hold, and you take a Sec hit equivalent to a ship kill. Clearly detected enough and your sec status will plummet. A hefty fine might also be applicable here (prob based upon the sec status of the system).
So, how to avoid detection?
'Smugglers Cove' - Worm Holes. Found through the exploration mechanics Worm Holes are one way 'back doors' out of a system. On discovery a worm hole will be marked on your overview stating its destination (e.g Langisi) just as for typical warp gates.
A worm hole spits you out adjacent to the destination systems sun, meaning you can avoid those CONCORD inspections at gates. Savvy smuggler gangs will likely split large qtys of contraband at this stage before risking a docking scan and placing their goods up for sale on the Contracts system.
Clearly these smuggling routes / worm holes will be very valuable in their own right as handy escape routes and could be sold or traded (on the Black Market perhaps?).
Player Scans: Players can also scan another players ship - however this detailed probing (unlike a cursory CONCORD sweep) has a 100% chance of detecting contraband goods: If detected the player may then agress the smuggler without any CONCORD intervention. Risky buisness smuggling.
Avoiding detection: At some stage a smuggler is going to have to risk a sweep. The chance of detection and / or the resultant sec hit on discovery could be modified by ship bonuses, modules, consumed booster, skills or implants (all naturally illegal themselves if held as cargo). Specialising in smuggling then becomes a real possibility.
I will add that these 'worm holes' wont be everywhere, at all times. Some will close as other open elsewhere.
A smuggler might have to take a good deal of time 'creeping' through systems to find these back doors - or he risks it and uses a gate. The chance of a worm hole even be present is based upon the sec level of a system. 1.0 systems would almost certainley have none, but a 0.1 system has a good chance of having a worm hole.
Any suggestions to these ideas here would be really appreciated.
C.
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
|
Secretgirl
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 03:19:00 -
[101]
Cailais I love your ideas. The secret is that CCP might use them.
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 19:17:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Secretgirl Cailais I love your ideas. The secret is that CCP might use them.
Thanks Secretgirl.
Id like to hear from a few more players who don't like these ideas - what looks fine to me, from my perspective, doesnt mean it looks great to someone else. If these ideas were touted in a dev blog what would your rants be???
C.
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 22:13:00 -
[103]
Edited by: Kerfira on 27/10/2007 22:13:23
Originally by: Cailais Introducing - The Fog of War.
Without the capabilities of Empire maintained communication relays your ships awareness its increasingly muted in Low Sec. This works by degrading your local scan range - in 1.0 space you see in local everyone within 100AU (99% of a system), in 0.9 this drops to 90AU and so on until 0.1 systems are down to 10AU radius for Local Intel.
This would be completely at odds with how local chat is (supposedly) handled by CCP's servers, and would be pretty expensive (in processing) to implement.
Afaik, local is not handled by the system node, but a separate system. This system is notified by the system node when players enter or leave the system, but has no knowledge of peoples position in system.
When a chat request comes in from a player, it is relayed to all other players in the system. Same when a player enters/leaves the system.
It's a nice simple architecture that doesn't put much load on the system node.
A mechanic as you outline would be much more complex since either the chat server would have to be kept up to speed about locations (which would mean extra lag JUST at the time of mass warp-in/jump-in... something we DON'T need), or the chat would need to be handled by the system node with the possibilities of lag exploitation inherent therein (something we don't need either).
Whether the idea is good or not I'm not going to comment on, but technically it's got some pretty major problems.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 22:28:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Kerfira Edited by: Kerfira on 27/10/2007 22:13:23
Originally by: Cailais Introducing - The Fog of War.
Without the capabilities of Empire maintained communication relays your ships awareness its increasingly muted in Low Sec. This works by degrading your local scan range - in 1.0 space you see in local everyone within 100AU (99% of a system), in 0.9 this drops to 90AU and so on until 0.1 systems are down to 10AU radius for Local Intel.
This would be completely at odds with how local chat is (supposedly) handled by CCP's servers, and would be pretty expensive (in processing) to implement.
Afaik, local is not handled by the system node, but a separate system. This system is notified by the system node when players enter or leave the system, but has no knowledge of peoples position in system.
When a chat request comes in from a player, it is relayed to all other players in the system. Same when a player enters/leaves the system.
It's a nice simple architecture that doesn't put much load on the system node.
A mechanic as you outline would be much more complex since either the chat server would have to be kept up to speed about locations (which would mean extra lag JUST at the time of mass warp-in/jump-in... something we DON'T need), or the chat would need to be handled by the system node with the possibilities of lag exploitation inherent therein (something we don't need either).
Whether the idea is good or not I'm not going to comment on, but technically it's got some pretty major problems.
Interesting, any Developers able to give some detail on this from Kerfira?
I wouldnt reccommend any process that increases lag, although 'lag' is often stated as a reason not to implement a great deal of ideas but with no foundation in fact (iirc a lot of players claimed 'heat' would cripple the servers, when this was a blatantly false conclusion).
I would suggest however that this could still work within these technical constraints by adding a 'mask' around a players ship: so while the 'local system' process continues to provide full player details, the system itself applies a mask (rather like an overlay).
This process must exist to an extent as we can scan players locations.
Any developer able to clarify this?
C.
*signature removed - please email us to find out why (include a link) - Jacques([email protected]) - sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Blind Man
Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 23:04:00 -
[105]
Edited by: Blind Man on 27/10/2007 23:09:57 love the ideas.. things like these are what I am hoping CCP will work on after rev3 (I believe rev3 code is frozen now?)
by revIII just about every type of mod has been nerfed, we have a new gfx engine and just about all the ships we need - it's time to fix low sec..implementing things like these are what I am waiting for to really get back into eve again. I wish for a change we could get some things that really help the game play of eve especially in low sec areas. I thing it would be cool to work in a better bounty hunting system (can pod yourself to get the isk atm..) along with better ways for anti-piracy to be viable (as it is unless someone is an outlaw an 'anti-pirate' will be flagged and receive as much penalties as an actual pirate does).
I'm honestly lost for ideas on the bounty system but it really does suck. For the anti pirate situation I think if you're security status is less than -1.0 you should be able to be shot at without the shooter at risk of security status loss (maybe not for the pod only for the ship?) and still have the safety of sentry guns until -5.0.. security status system could use a revamp too - anti pirates should be able to gain security status from killing outlaws.
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 23:20:00 -
[106]
100% agree with you that sec status gain should be possible through the destruction of a players whose sec status is negative.
The simplest Bounty Hunting concept is to allow a player whose ship has been destroyed (even if he defended himself) a granted tradable kill right on the contracts system.
Simply realised this would be a contract that states 'pod this "unkown" person, and hand me the corpse: get X isk'. The "unknown" revealed once you accept the contract. It is exploitable but it is probably better than the current system.
C.
*signature removed - please email us to find out why (include a link) - Jacques([email protected]) - sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Sorja
E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 23:44:00 -
[107]
What about REMOVING low sec, turning it into 0.0 and improving worthless 0.0 regions? ____________________ A gentleman is someone who can play the bagpipe, but who does not. |
Cailais
Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 23:56:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Sorja What about REMOVING low sec, turning it into 0.0 and improving worthless 0.0 regions?
Because 0.0 is ultimately about player driven infrastructure. And not all players are motivated or enjoy this style of play. I think of the sec status system like bands of temperature, High Sec is cool, low sec warm and 0.0 hot. Removing low sec gives just hot or cold.
Low Sec also offers a process whereby a new player can aclimatise to the rigours of 0.0 space, but with some measure of security.
They styles of play between the three classic states are different. I think my proposal adds more of a 'controled descent' into 0.0. Players instinctivley understand that as the sec status drops so the risks increase: but that doesnt occur at the fine level, its far more abrupt. There's no real difference between 0.4 space and 0.1
There's actually a huge amount of both high sec, and 0.0 - low sec space is not that endemic (even though Id certainly vote for more of it with improvements such as those suggested here by myself and others).
Whats 'worthless' about some 0.0 regions? Are you speaking in pure isk terms or content?
C.
*signature removed - please email us to find out why (include a link) - Jacques([email protected]) - sig d |
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2007.10.28 09:48:00 -
[109]
Edited by: Kerfira on 28/10/2007 09:52:36
Originally by: Cailais I would suggest however that this could still work within these technical constraints by adding a 'mask' around a players ship: so while the 'local system' process continues to provide full player details, the system itself applies a mask (rather like an overlay).
This process must exist to an extent as we can scan players locations.
This is how I understand the EVE server setup is working. Note that I may be wrong on some points since CCP has only released limited information about it.
There exist 4 types of servers (nodes):
- Front-end nodes: These manage the connections to the player clients. They handle packing and decoding of messages to/from player clients.
- Star system nodes: These handle everything that happens to your ship in space (movement/combat/etc.).
- 'Specialty' nodes: These handle isolated systems like the chat/markets/etc.
- Database nodes: Self-explanatory....
The front-ends receive a command from a player client, and routes it to either a system node or a specialty node depending on what it is. If its a move or shoot command for examplem, its routed to the relevant system node, and if its a trade/chat/etc. command, its routed to the relevant specialty node. This is a pretty normal way of doing stuff in a client/server world since it means you can distribute load much better than if one server handled it all.
The system and specialty nodes don't exchange information directly, but works through the database. For the system nodes, they cache a lot of the data about a player and only store it in the database at certain points (like when you enter/leave the system or gets killed). Put a simple trigger on the 'system location' and 'online/offline' fields in the players data, and these are then used to update the 'local' chat channels without putting ANY load on the system nodes. The specialty nodes probably access the database more than the system nodes since we're talking about a lot more data than simple ship info.
This should be more or less how things work. As you can see, any change to local would be pretty hard to implement in this structure without causing extra load on the system nodes since it'd require access to data only present there.
The scan command you mention is routed by the front-end to the system node, so its already 'there' so to speak. It'll use a tiny bit of system node CPU, but it is basically only a retrieval of data already cached data, whereas a chat line is receiving first one command from a player, then sending one command to ALL players in system.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 01:14:00 -
[110]
There have been loads of topics about 'carebearing up' low sec. Making it all nice and fluffy - so I thought Id bump this idea of mine I had some time ago.
The concept of the 'fog of war' might not be a technical possibility, but I still think some of the other ideas have potential.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 01:35:00 -
[111]
Awaiting "membrane" idea :)
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 02:07:00 -
[112]
Originally by: Adunh Slavy Awaiting "membrane" idea :)
Yeah sorry Adunh, Imstill working on it. Got to the point where I felt it was too complex, and too far removed from 'Eve'. Membrane might not be the right word, perhaps a more 'porous' or more permeable Eve is a better description.
Ive found (as probably you did) that its a catch 22 situation; make low sec / 0.0 more accessible and you make it harder to defend, and harder to interdict players in travel. Make it less accessible and you have more players bunching up; wether thats over a wider view (say empire populations vs 0.0 populations) or a narrow view (like gate camp blobs).
Smuggling Gates is as far as Ive got so far; i.e a known mechanic (gates) twinned with another known mechanic (exploration) to produce a third option (Im counting gate to gate travel and cyno jump systems as the first two).
Im quite intrigued by your Oort cloud / belt, and Im thinking maybe systems are bigger - or rather have another outer layer that acts as a 'mid point' between systems: you warp into a system, warp to that systems Oort Belt, warp to the next systems Oort cloud/belt and then warp into the system.
Im thinking along the lines of that 'outer layer' being more, or less, devoid of security. So you can choose a longer, potentialy less secured route - or a more traditional gate route to reach your destination. Oort Belts being the equivalent of going 'off road'.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
Pans Exual
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 02:23:00 -
[113]
Why are some of you acting like refitting in space is new? You can do it at a POS, or at a carrier. Why not at a ruined station?
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 02:38:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Pans Exual Why are some of you acting like refitting in space is new? You can do it at a POS, or at a carrier. Why not at a ruined station?
Very true. In fact I think we should do more 'in space' and rather less 'in a station'. Tethering to a ruined station is admitedly a more vulnerable process of course.
This also opens up some other people suggestions of super caps acting more as 'mobile stations', perhaps smaller ships could perform similar roles at a reduced level?
One of the big draws of Eve (for me at any rate) is its potential as a persitant world (i.e that it changes as a result of players actions). However that doesnt mean that the 'landscape' (POSs, stations, Sov) has to be totaly static: maybe in fact its better if it isnt.
Im going off topic again...
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
Sodium Phosphate
Gallente Ganja Labs Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 02:54:00 -
[115]
TBH I think the Oort cloud thing is not worth the effort, as some systems do not have such things or are just too far apart. It would work in game, but would cripple my sense of reality that I currently have mid-warp as I pass the sun of a system.
Otherwise I'm go for the 'fade' idea, which can be reasonably explained rp wise so that wont hurt. And it would add to the loneliness of space..
Ruined stations...eh. Its cool but not attractive yet, same with the 'combi' mods. they seem to easy to make a pwnage setup out of. You could argue they'd go through intensive testing, but that wont matter when they are the new FOTM.
|
Jerusalem Eve
Amarr Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 03:04:00 -
[116]
Calais: Good thread, at least some real ideas to fix "broken" low sec.
Here is my idea. How about spliting low sec into different kinds of low sec? "Pirate" low sec and "Empire" low sec.
"Empire" low sec can add some rules to make low sec safer. No more Gatecamps, the guns are no longer tankable by any ship for long as the damage and ewar will increase rapidly to deter camping at gates and stations. So .4 the guns get nastier much faster than say .1. Also, roaming Concord in Empire low sec to hunt people with sec status of -2 or less. No increase in rewards from what we currently have. Its supposed to be the beginner's low sec.
"Pirate" low sec fixes some of the other complaints people have about low sec. The idea is to make this space "0.0 lite". So, shooting someone no longer lowers your sec rating to CONCORD. This addresses one of the big complaints of empire low sec that being pro active at defending yourself gives a sec hit. Well that's fixed! The gate guns are removed. So yes you can gatecamp to protect your turf but warp bubbles are still not allowed. Warp bubbles are a feature of 0.0 space. What goodies are here that lure people in? 0.0 Asteroids to mine, pirate agents with nice items to get from LP and some BSes in rat spawns. There should be a high enough density of pirate stations so that each system can support a population.
CCP: At least make some attempt to "fix" low sec even if we have to have "experimental" low sec to see if we can invent a low sec that works for everyone.
|
squall321
Gallente Unity Of Legends
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 03:05:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Cailais
Im thinking along the lines of that 'outer layer' being more, or less, devoid of security. So you can choose a longer, potentialy less secured route - or a more traditional gate route to reach your destination. Oort Belts being the equivalent of going 'off road'.
C.
I actually really like this idea. it brings a whole new aspect to space travel. the distance between each "outer layer" could be up to XXX AU however it be implemented.
Another aspect that could be brought in with this in mind of corse, is new modules that only work in this "devoid space" say for instance a module that can pick the ships out of warp. but obviously is limited in size. but great aspect. But iw ouldnt like this idea in hi sec. newbies would get absolutely lost lol and the petition system would melt.
But yea maybe an extra option on the right click menu to warp to the edge of the system. or it could just be easy to get there by finding the outside ring with the planet on it. -----------
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 03:59:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Adunh Slavy Awaiting "membrane" idea :)
Yeah sorry Adunh, Im still working on it. ... catch 22 à
Smuggling Gates à
à Oort cloud / belt à 'mid point' between systems à devoid of security. So you can choose à less secured route - or a more traditional gate route à off road'.
That's an intriguing idea. If you want, send me what you have and I'll point a few brain cells at it and see what turns up. The general idea, or perhaps philosophical idea of exchanging time (less secure but less known) for perfect knowledge (gates) is rather central to the Real Space thing. Might be a compromise and/or merger of ideas in here some where. The real key to it all is known choke points vrs the balancing mechanics on how an attacker would overcome imperfect knowledge in an equitable way, your cited catch 22.
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
Mallikan
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 03:59:00 -
[119]
This.. wow.. is an excellent idea. --- lol.. I messed up.
|
DarkSim Field
Gun Metal Priests Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 05:09:00 -
[120]
This idea is quite frankly marvelous. Its good for everyone:
-PVPers get targets -Producers get a new market (for boosters etc.) -Carebears get another avenue to make money (black market trade)
I hope CCP have a look at this. I'd still like to see it boosted a bit more with better missions in low-sec.
Add to the same patch FAR better exploration content in null-sec. Atm null-sec exploration is a little worthless... (but that is another issue on its own)
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |