EVE Search - What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth

» 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 .. 13 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:01:00 - [211] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Esmenet Edited by: Esmenet on 08/08/2008 13:45:10 Originally by: Lord WarATron Originally by: Esmenet Limitations and competition needs to be introduced for missions like any other resource in EVE. What a bad idea. Whatever limit you make, people will use alts to get around it. People will just use alts. Even 1 mission per day and people will use alts so you acheived nothing. Also, do you even relise how bad the logic is? You want to get more cloak ravens ratting in 0.0? Oh wait, lets stop that as well by limit rats such as a few spawns a day. Lets nerf traders by limiting who many people can buy from you a day. Lets nerf PvPers by limiting how many people they can kill. TBH they should nerf people like you from posting without playing the game. The OP has not a clue what he is talking about. Most players dont have alts (see one of the economy dev blogs i think). It still will take a lot more effort if you want to keep 5 alts up to do what you could do with one earlier. Ratting is limited and has plenty of competition. Trading is limited and has plenty of competition. PVP is limited and has plenty of competition. Mining is limited and has plenty of competition. Exploration is limited and has plenty of competition. Face it any activity besides missioning has limited available resources and is open to competition from other players. Cloaking ratters is really another issue completely. 2,5 characters for account, so plenty of alts. Ratting is limited and has plenty of competition Trading is not limited and has plenty of competition PVP is not limited and is competition Mining is limited and has plenty of competition Exploration is not limited and has plenty of competition sites respawn immediatly as completed Trading is limited by volume traded in a station. Pvp is limited by the number of targets. Exploration is limited by the number of sites. Vote against the nano nerf!
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:03:00 - [212] Trade IS limited. With NPC products, they have a limited supply per week or somesuch. With player products, the supply is obviously limited by the number of products produced. Then, demand has it's limitations as well. Missions are the ONLY facet of the player economy that are infinitely renewable. If you don't think 'easy, cheap isk' is bad, then what is wrong with a government producing as much money as it wants? Again, you should be able to log on and run a few missions, no problem. You should be able to log on and mine some veldspar, too. But if you want to be more than a casual gamer, you should be competing for the resources you want, i.e. level 4 missions and ice fields. The fact that many refuse to accept that competition is a founding principle of EvE is only CAPITULATED by missions. They don't make the game better, because they convince so many that they can 'survive without'. EvE should have casual aspects, but it should NOT be a casual game, especially if the sacrifice is just made for more subscriptions. There are enough casual games on the market, are there not? I don't think you can stop more casual, and decidedly more boring, gamers from moving from WoW to EvE. I do think it's wrong that they feel that since there are more of them, everything should cater to their wants and desires. But the game will continue to grow. I would like to see it keep some basic principles, however, without perverting it's overall design. Removing level 4 missions altogether, I feel, wouldn't help anything. But requiring competition for those nice missions and good agents, I feel, WOULD reinstate the design that EvE is player vs. player. So we disagree. Sadly, because there are more of you than me, most likely you're pocketbook will win out. So when you leave the game after four months, because your NPC lifestyle isn't enough to keep you interested, I'm SURE you will be brokenhearted that another game is ruined to suit your pandering, boring playstyle. While those who HAVE been devoted subscribers to this game for years, are ignored and pushed aside. Good thing government doesn't work that way. So you want security? That's perfectly alright. But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.
Amateratsu Caldari Terra Incognita Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:05:00 - [213] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Amateratsu It is a well known fact that the majority of eve's playerbase live in highsec.. Why? Because the majority of players play eve to relax and have fun doing whatever is it they enjoy doing in the game, with out having to worry about other players trying to blow them up all the time. Proof please. I've provided evidence that it could well be because of purely economic reasons. You only need to look at eyjog's (or whatever his name is) economic report for prove that the majority of players live in highsec. Why they live in highsec is open for debate, but the fact is they do. therefore ccp must cater to the needs of those players. á
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:09:00 - [214] Originally by: Amateratsu Why they live in highsec is open for debate, but the fact is they do. therefore ccp must cater to the needs of those players. The majority do live there, but that dont mean that they should have to cater to them. Vote against the nano nerf!
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:11:00 - [215] Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Amateratsu Why they live in highsec is open for debate, but the fact is they do. therefore ccp must cater to the needs of those players. The majority do live there, but that dont mean that they should have to cater to them. Who should they be catering to? One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:13:00 - [216] Originally by: Amateratsu Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Amateratsu It is a well known fact that the majority of eve's playerbase live in highsec.. Why? Because the majority of players play eve to relax and have fun doing whatever is it they enjoy doing in the game, with out having to worry about other players trying to blow them up all the time. Proof please. I've provided evidence that it could well be because of purely economic reasons. You only need to look at eyjog's (or whatever his name is) economic report for prove that the majority of players live in highsec. Why they live in highsec is open for debate, but the fact is they do. therefore ccp must cater to the needs of those players. Why must it, though? What if CCP has sufficiently catered to the needs of those players, and yet those players refuse to take the steps necessary to reach the catering? CCP will eventually have to dumb down the game to cater to those who are too weak, cowardly, or simply don't have enough initiative to go out and achieve what they want. Most of the world wants everything handed to them. Should we cater to these individuals too? EvE is fun for many. But if CCP wants more subscriptions, there are a lot of things in EvE that will have to change immensely. What are YOU willing to have changed to cater to the broader and decidedly stupider audience? Let's go all the way, and really cater to the masses. Ships shouldn't be destroyed when you die, because a casual gamer doesn't want to have to hassle to replace them. CCP should seed the market with all kinds of player ships and modules, that way noone can 'take over the market' and thus cause others issues. Astroid belts should be infinite. Factory and research slots should work just like Agents, and thus be unlimited, so there are no players having to fight for these valuable resources. And players should be capped to an effective SP limit, so that there are no players completely outdoing any others. Let's continue to cater. Let's continue to bend EvE for the broadest playerbase. And to coin a phrase I hate and that is often overused, let's make 'WoW' in space. So you want security? That's perfectly alright. But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.
Amateratsu Caldari Terra Incognita Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:14:00 - [217] Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Amateratsu Why they live in highsec is open for debate, but the fact is they do. therefore ccp must cater to the needs of those players. The majority do live there, but that dont mean that they should have to cater to them. CCP don't have to cater to the majority of its players, but to not do so would not be a good way to retain those players or retain eve continued groth and finatial viabillity. á
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:14:00 - [218] Originally by: Exlegion Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Amateratsu Why they live in highsec is open for debate, but the fact is they do. therefore ccp must cater to the needs of those players. The majority do live there, but that dont mean that they should have to cater to them. Who should they be catering to? They should be catering to the game as a whole so that it is balanced in terms with the vision of the game. That used to be a competitive game with a balance of risk/reward. Vote against the nano nerf!
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:18:00 - [219] Let EvE continue to sacrifice it's principles to keep the playerbase happy. Just like a good politician. Then all of a sudden, you look at EvE and go "why am I playing this game again?" So you want security? That's perfectly alright. But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.
Amateratsu Caldari Terra Incognita Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:22:00 - [220] Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Exlegion Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Amateratsu Why they live in highsec is open for debate, but the fact is they do. therefore ccp must cater to the needs of those players. The majority do live there, but that dont mean that they should have to cater to them. Who should they be catering to? They should be catering to the game as a whole so that it is balanced in terms with the vision of the game. That used to be a competitive game with a balance of risk/reward. Is that not what they are doing with the constant rebalancing? (nerfs if you like) At the end of the day the devs will decide if they believe missions are too rewarding for too little risk. we will have to wait and see á

Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:24:00 - [221] Originally by: Amateratsu Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Exlegion Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Amateratsu Why they live in highsec is open for debate, but the fact is they do. therefore ccp must cater to the needs of those players. The majority do live there, but that dont mean that they should have to cater to them. Who should they be catering to? They should be catering to the game as a whole so that it is balanced in terms with the vision of the game. That used to be a competitive game with a balance of risk/reward. Is that not what they are doing with the constant rebalancing? (nerfs if you like) No with the current "rebalancing" they are doing the complete opposite of what they have claimed is their vision of EVE. Vote against the nano nerf!
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:27:00 - [222] True on the waiting on the devs. Personally, I don't think a lot of the devs changes are directed at 'pleasing the playerbase' directly. Specifically those I've seen since coming back, like the upcoming nano nerf and the suicide fix. The prior seems more like a problem that's happening on the database, and the latter seems like common sense. So you want security? That's perfectly alright. But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:30:00 - [223] Originally by: Esmenet They should be catering to the game as a whole so that it is balanced in terms with the vision of the game. That used to be a competitive game with a balance of risk/reward. CCP is balancing the game. And Eve is catering to the game as a whole. But there are still those who insist in CCP not to cater players who decide to play the game in a different style than theirs. There are players that insist in their right to ruin these players' fun because their own fun depends on the misery of others. They insist that is their right to impose their right unto others. And in Eve you can do that; mostly in low sec and 0.0. But that's not enough for them. They want their own views imposed to those living in high sec as well. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:31:00 - [224] Originally by: Ruze Personally, I don't think a lot of the devs changes are directed at 'pleasing the playerbase' directly. Specifically those I've seen since coming back, like the upcoming nano nerf and the suicide fix. Well the 2 biggest whinetopics before these changes was announced was suicide ganking and nanos. Primarily started by high sec missioners. Vote against the nano nerf!
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:33:00 - [225] Originally by: Exlegion Originally by: Esmenet They should be catering to the game as a whole so that it is balanced in terms with the vision of the game. That used to be a competitive game with a balance of risk/reward. CCP is balancing the game. And Eve is catering to the game as a whole. But there are still those who insist in CCP not to cater players who decide to play the game in a different style than theirs. There are players that insist in their right to ruin these players' fun because their own fun depends on the misery of others. They insist that is their right to impose their right unto others. And in Eve you can do that; mostly in low sec and 0.0. But that's not enough for them. They want their own views imposed to those living in high sec as well. Such a tired and weak argument that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. Just shows you run out of real arguments. The game is supposed to be competitive. No player lives in a bubble alone. Vote against the nano nerf!
Nogap toosmall	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:34:00 - [226] Edited by: Nogap toosmall on 08/08/2008 14:34:25 If everyones goal in the game was to make as much money as possible, and that was the only goal then you might have a point with this whinethread. As (happily) this is not the case, I think its a bit of a moot point. If you want a slice of the easy (but boring) cash, come along to highsec If you want a slice of the much more fun (but expensive) null sec, go play there Noone, anywhere, is making you choose a particular course of action you are doing that
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:35:00 - [227] Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Exlegion Originally by: Esmenet They should be catering to the game as a whole so that it is balanced in terms with the vision of the game. That used to be a competitive game with a balance of risk/reward. CCP is balancing the game. And Eve is catering to the game as a whole. But there are still those who insist in CCP not to cater players who decide to play the game in a different style than theirs. There are players that insist in their right to ruin these players' fun because their own fun depends on the misery of others. They insist that is their right to impose their right unto others. And in Eve you can do that; mostly in low sec and 0.0. But that's not enough for them. They want their own views imposed to those living in high sec as well. Such a tired and weak argument that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. Just shows you run out of real arguments. The game is supposed to be competitive. No player lives in a bubble alone. Very nice ad hom, Ki An, considering you brought up the subject. I answered your question and you attack me with this. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Amateratsu Caldari Terra Incognita Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:35:00 - [228] Originally by: Esmenet No with the current "rebalancing" they are doing the complete opposite of what they have claimed is their vision of EVE. Maybe their vision has changed? or maybe they dissagree with what you believe to be their vision of the game? I for one would not want to be in the devs shoes trying to decide what is the best course of action for the game. No matter what they do, there will be a persentage of players who are not happy with their decisions. At the end of the day we have to adapt and live with those decisions or quit and move on. The devs will continue to do what they believe is right for the game. I for 1 will adapt and continue to play, I'm not throwing away over 110m sp across 3 accounts / chars over a few minor changes á
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:39:00 - [229] Originally by: Amateratsu Maybe their vision has changed? or maybe they dissagree with what you believe to be their vision of the game? Thats completely fine by me. Its CCP's game so they can do whatever they want. But then i hope that CCP stops lying to my face and tells me their vision has changed so i dont waste my time on something i wont like. Vote against the nano nerf!
Nogap toosmall	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:40:00 - [230] Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Exlegion Originally by: Esmenet They should be catering to the game as a whole so that it is balanced in terms with the vision of the game. That used to be a competitive game with a balance of risk/reward. CCP is balancing the game. And Eve is catering to the game as a whole. But there are still those who insist in CCP not to cater players who decide to play the game in a different style than theirs. There are players that insist in their right to ruin these players' fun because their own fun depends on the misery of others. They insist that is their right to impose their right unto others. And in Eve you can do that; mostly in low sec and 0.0. But that's not enough for them. They want their own views imposed to those living in high sec as well. Such a tired and weak argument that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. Just shows you run out of real arguments. The game is supposed to be competitive. No player lives in a bubble alone. Actually its a very good argument, the only reason this thread was written was to try and point out that high-sec makes cash, and lots of it. The motivation behind that would appear to be a dislike of anything carebear, and pointing out how unfair it is that high sec players can generate cash... ...to spend on more gear in high sec... We all pay our subs, some people prefer the quieter life in highsec, I really dont see why anyone has a problem with that. You want to shoot people with no risk to your sec rating, fine go to 0.0. Seems to me the argument is either "i want to shoot everyone everywhere with no consequence" or "im scared of 0.0, please let me shoot the soft targets in empire" Either argument is *******s

Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:40:00 - [231] Originally by: Exlegion Originally by: Esmenet They should be catering to the game as a whole so that it is balanced in terms with the vision of the game. That used to be a competitive game with a balance of risk/reward. CCP is balancing the game. And Eve is catering to the game as a whole. But there are still those who insist in CCP not to cater players who decide to play the game in a different style than theirs. There are players that insist in their right to ruin these players' fun because their own fun depends on the misery of others. They insist that is their right to impose their right unto others. And in Eve you can do that; mostly in low sec and 0.0. But that's not enough for them. They want their own views imposed to those living in high sec as well. I see the point you are trying to make, and I'll make a different one: I believe that players should be able to exist in highsec, risk free. I don't see anything wrong with running NPC missions or mining. I do it myself. I'm not a pirate, and the only time I've ever 'ganked' anyone was during legitimate fleet ops. I've never had a negative sec on any of my characters. I don't enjoy others misery, and am perfectly willing to help out on missions or with advice if I know it. So what class do I fall under in your categorization? I don't think that high-quality missions, the missions I myself do all the time, should be an infinite resource. I think all levels of this game, besides missions, require competition. I don't think missions should be different. And if I come across the time when I can't do missions in highsec? I'll get a couple buddies, friends I've made in this great MMO, probably try to include one or two 'reluctants' as well (just to prove the point), and I'll make forays into losec. So you want your own corner of space where nobody can harm you? That's great. But in the rest of this universe, there is no such thing. If your world is different, why should it also be infinitely profitable with little or no competition and risk? Why do you have to have all the bells and whistles, when you refuse to do what the rest of us have had to do: go outside our comfort zone? Play your game, great, wonderful. If you love it, if you enjoy it, that's great too. But having the developers change the founding principle of the game so you can casually be a mutli-billionaire with the finest, untouchable ships? I think that's being just a tad arrogant. Trying to lump anyone who opposes you into the same category of 'griefers' and slimebags is an underhanded and immature tactic that I would expect to see in a political debate, but not a reasonably discussion. Maybe I'm reading your words wrong. If I am, then I am wrong. But if I'm not ... So you want security? That's perfectly alright. But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:42:00 - [232] Originally by: Nogap toosmall We all pay our subs, some people prefer the quieter life in highsec, I really dont see why anyone has a problem with that. You want to shoot people with no risk to your sec rating, fine go to 0.0. This is a competitive game, you dont live in a bubble alone. What you do matters a lot for the rest of the players. Vote against the nano nerf!
Nogap toosmall	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:43:00 - [233] Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Nogap toosmall We all pay our subs, some people prefer the quieter life in highsec, I really dont see why anyone has a problem with that. You want to shoot people with no risk to your sec rating, fine go to 0.0. This is a competitive game, you dont live in a bubble alone. What you do matters a lot for the rest of the players. Yes it is, and you can still attack a player anywhere you like, that has not changed. All they are doing is reducing the volume of this type of kill and in the process changing the value of these kills to a higher amount.
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:44:00 - [234] Originally by: Nogap toosmall Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Nogap toosmall We all pay our subs, some people prefer the quieter life in highsec, I really dont see why anyone has a problem with that. You want to shoot people with no risk to your sec rating, fine go to 0.0. This is a competitive game, you dont live in a bubble alone. What you do matters a lot for the rest of the players. Yes it is, and you can still attack a player anywhere you like, that has not changed. All they are doing is reducing the volume of this type of kill and in the process changing the value of these kills to a higher amount. Sigh it doesnt have to have anything to do with shooting other players. Vote against the nano nerf!
Malcanis We are Legend eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:44:00 - [235] Originally by: Amateratsu Originally by: Esmenet No with the current "rebalancing" they are doing the complete opposite of what they have claimed is their vision of EVE. Maybe their vision has changed? or maybe they dissagree with what you believe to be their vision of the game? I don't discount the possibility. In fact I think it's more than likely, sadly enough. They're quite entitled to do with it as they wish. If they're planning to incrementally make it safer, easier, more mainstream then more power to them. I'd just like to know so that I can avoid making long term plans. On the other hand, if they're of the opinion that the pendulum has swung a little too far and is due for a return, then people who are invested in low-risk gameplay styles will also wish to be aware of this. That's why I've supported the request for the EvE devs to make a clear, honest statement about where they believe the state of the game is and where they want it to go. As I wrote the above, a third alternative occurred to me: they might not know where they want to go from here (or there might be significant internal dissension). That would be the most respectable reason for the stony silence we're getting. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
El Mauru Amarr Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:45:00 - [236] IMHO would be nice if you could only use the same agent every Xth mission. Make it every 4th or 5th and people will have to move around more. It could help ease up the tension on the chore mission systems, encourage some new kind of logistics chain, limit meta-gaming and be a tad more logical. -
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:49:00 - [237] That's my prime argument, and it has little relation to this post: There are players who want it all, who want to earn the best isk and fly the best ships, but don't want to have to be 'forced' to compete or earn to get it. "Let us play the game as we like", they say. But every isk they make inflates the economy. Every mass of modules they refine hurt the industrial professions, which ARE hampered by limited resources. Every ship they buy is almost guaranteed to last for the length of their ownership. About they only things they have to expend are for ammo. Everything else is bank. My argument is that nothing in this game should be so simple and easy. I don't play EvE to play with WoW mission miners who exist only for themselves. If I wanted to play those games, I WOULD be playing them. Instead, over two years ago (closer to three), I decided to come back and play EvE, which was much like real life. What had to be gained and gotten, you had to go and get. Now the playerbase wants coddling? Like children? I despise games like WoW BECAUSE of their simplicity, their ignorant nativity, and because they are designed for the lowest common denominator of the playerbase, the poor smucks who want the world handed to them and don't want to achieve for it. I love EvE because it is different. And I think missions need to reflect that difference along with everything else. So you want security? That's perfectly alright. But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.
Nogap toosmall	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:49:00 - [238] Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Nogap toosmall Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Nogap toosmall We all pay our subs, some people prefer the quieter life in highsec, I really dont see why anyone has a problem with that. You want to shoot people with no risk to your sec rating, fine go to 0.0. This is a competitive game, you dont live in a bubble alone. What you do matters a lot for the rest of the players. Yes it is, and you can still attack a player anywhere you like, that has not changed. All they are doing is reducing the volume of this type of kill and in the process changing the value of these kills to a higher amount. Sigh it doesnt have to have anything to do with shooting other players. Ah so its about balance then, im actually honestly suprised. The fact remains, that in order to experience everything this game offers you have to be in 0.0. Fact. If you want to nerf the cash available in high sec to make low sec more profitable on a risk / reward basis then you had better get ready for a bunch of threads either crying about that, or demanding that all techs (yes titans too) are available in high sec after all, its only fair.....
Ioci Gallente Ioci Exploration	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:54:00 - [239] I've been back to Eve for around 10 months, spent most of it in 0.0 sec, ratting. For the first moonth, I was in high untill I got used to the interface again. I killed 4 high sec Shadow Serpentis. None dropped faction or implants. In 9 months, I killed 1 true Sansha. He dropped a Neutalizer Blueprint. I get to haul all my stuff out to high sec. I get to dodge the roaming blobs. I don't have a problem with high sec level 4's. I have a buddy, older guy, doesn't care for the kill em all game. Sits in high and runs 4's. He has a CNR a billion or so ISK and he's happy and I wouldn't take that from him. But I really would like to know where my reward is. I have no plans to join him. I can't do it but I need to ask myself some times..
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.08 14:54:00 - [240] Edited by: Esmenet on 08/08/2008 14:55:31 Originally by: Nogap toosmall Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Nogap toosmall Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Nogap toosmall We all pay our subs, some people prefer the quieter life in highsec, I really dont see why anyone has a problem with that. You want to shoot people with no risk to your sec rating, fine go to 0.0. This is a competitive game, you dont live in a bubble alone. What you do matters a lot for the rest of the players. Yes it is, and you can still attack a player anywhere you like, that has not changed. All they are doing is reducing the volume of this type of kill and in the process changing the value of these kills to a higher amount. Sigh it doesnt have to have anything to do with shooting other players. Ah so its about balance then, im actually honestly suprised. The fact remains, that in order to experience everything this game offers you have to be in 0.0. Fact. If you want to nerf the cash available in high sec to make low sec more profitable on a risk / reward basis then you had better get ready for a bunch of threads either crying about that, or demanding that all techs (yes titans too) are available in high sec after all, its only fair..... Read the post by Ruze one step up as he explains it better than i have patience to do. If you want titans and bubbles in high sec thats fine by me, but it will hurt you a lot more than help you. What you are talking about here is making everything into 0.0 and thats very different from what i am asking for. Vote against the nano nerf!



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: 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.