These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

More FW changes on SiSi

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#301 - 2012-05-06 17:28:59 UTC
SigmaPi wrote:
Not that I don't agree with you on this point, but there are ways of dealing with it. You could put up a staging pos in the system you're attacking with a ship maintenance array - each corp or alliance just needs a small to get it done. I think it brings some much needed logistical considerations to a fairly easy place to live, and I like that about the system.


Siggy is absolutely right. Regardless of what everyone likes or doesn't like about the changes on the table, as long as there are capsuleers proposing creative solutions to the challenges presented before the Faction Warfare community, CCP has little incentive to change their course and cater to those that feel that one change or another makes things "impossible" or "hopeless".

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#302 - 2012-05-06 17:29:06 UTC
Mutnin wrote:
..Anyway I think it's irrelevant as I see no proof of any sort of sliding LP scale on SISI for the Stores. as Gal MIlitia stores have same costs as Caldari.

They are probably planning on using a system similar to what is in place for mission payouts, so the scale won't start sliding on SiSi at all due to the low number of data points. Hell, when they added it to missions on TQ it took a few weeks (and umpteen thousand missions) to reach its equilibrium.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#303 - 2012-05-06 17:34:41 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:

Would CCP please re-set 0.0 sov when they finally get around to fixing that broken mechanic?
Let's be crystal clear about what we're talking about here and cut through some of the hysteria. "Sov reset" is actually a misleading and inaccurate term for what is being discussed.
There are many systems that have been held for a very long time and have had nothing to do with a last minute rush to secure systems. LOL at CCP if they decide to kick players out of systems they clearly and control - whether it's called Occupancy or Sovereignty. We'll adjust. Please give us some notice first so we can move massive amounts of ships out of our home systems due to no fault of our own.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#304 - 2012-05-06 17:38:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
X Gallentius wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:

Would CCP please re-set 0.0 sov when they finally get around to fixing that broken mechanic?
Let's be crystal clear about what we're talking about here and cut through some of the hysteria. "Sov reset" is actually a misleading and inaccurate term for what is being discussed.
There are many systems that have been held for a very long time and have had nothing to do with a last minute rush to secure systems. LOL at CCP if they decide to kick players out of systems they clearly and control - whether it's called Occupancy or Sovereignty. We'll adjust. Please give us some notice first so we can move massive amounts of ships out of our home systems due to no fault of our own.


That's exactly why I've been encouraging them to release a dev blog ASAP, and I have little reason to believe that CCP is going to make any change like that without giving players plenty of notice.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Hidden Snake
Inglorious-Basterds
#305 - 2012-05-06 17:38:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Hidden Snake
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:

Would CCP please re-set 0.0 sov when they finally get around to fixing that broken mechanic?


Let's be crystal clear about what we're talking about here and cut through some of the hysteria. "Sov reset" is actually a misleading and inaccurate term for what is being discussed.

Huola has always been the sovereign space of the Amarr Empire. Auga has always been the sovereign space of the Minmatar Republic. That has never once been adjusted, modified, or changed, and continuity of this fact into the May 22 expansion would not truly be a "Sov reset". The argument that CCP should reset 0.0 sovereignty is a straw-man, because we're not actually talking about CCP moving sovereignty lines, though that is how everyone is interpreting this.

What CCP proposed at Fan Fest was removing the meaningless occupancy mechanic, and giving capsuleers the ability to fight over actual Sovereignty. Many pilots made an assumption at this point, and planned efforts to reinforce their occupation in enemy sovereign space, despite the fact that CCP was saying they would be removing occupancy entirely. These pilots assumed that CCP would just arbitrarily change occupancy into Sovereignty, which would indeed be a shuffling of who has sovereignty, a forced adjustment akin to fiddling with null sec Sov as you pointed out. Saying that current Sovereignty designations will remain the same following the May 22 is not truly a "Sov reset" and therefore not some radical action akin to what you are suggesting.

The bottom line is that neither CCP nor the CSM can advocate rules or changes that are based upon the actions capsuleers take in anticipation of a package of changes that was never set in stone, and still isn't set in stone. It's a tough pill to swallow for some, but every single patch there is a similar flurry of economic activity, and plenty of pilots have lost billions before speculating on future changes that may or may not come to pass. CCP cannot change that policy now and make Sovereignty adjustments simply because pilots moved into enemy sov space under the assumption it would magically become their own.

We could debate this all day, or we can simply and see what the final package and procedure is going to be when the dev blog comes out this week. Either way, players will have almost two weeks to gird themselves for the coming war and prepare their battle plans.


Hans ... I understand u have to advocate as CSM .... However reaction of people here and in game actually shows the whole fw package is bad and it actually shows that there is no concept for low sec as a independent playground (last fun sandbox if u want). As it looks somebody in ccp wants just ruin last pieces of fun smaller scale warfare and is honestly for the first time driving me to alternative of leaving fw /disbanding no.1 caldari corp and potentially quiting eve (but as i am not ragequiter i am very careful with that).

Please nobody react to this with silly comments, as this will be on serious discussion with my directors once i will be back from trip in next 2 days.

If ccp does not understa ds comments made here, it does mean they dont play this part of game and therefor e dont want to fix/improve it. Just silly boy there wants us all run to null.

I allways wanted to low become the home for independent souls. Some scumbags want it to be silly place. **** the nullbears!
Damar Rocarion
Nasranite Watch
#306 - 2012-05-06 17:47:38 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
There are many systems that have been held for a very long time and have had nothing to do with a last minute rush to secure systems. LOL at CCP if they decide to kick players out of systems they clearly and control - whether it's called Occupancy or Sovereignty. We'll adjust. Please give us some notice first so we can move massive amounts of ships out of our home systems due to no fault of our own.


Currently any of our staging systems can probably be taken by the jesus blob you can summon on saturday prime time to plex for 6 hours, nothing really factors into it. However, it seems you holding on the them is not necessarily so easy as has been show on few occasions. However, the inevitable last hour rushes will pretty much make mockery of this in all levels, no matter which side does it.
Almity
In Exile.
#307 - 2012-05-06 17:59:50 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
SigmaPi wrote:
Not that I don't agree with you on this point, but there are ways of dealing with it. You could put up a staging pos in the system you're attacking with a ship maintenance array - each corp or alliance just needs a small to get it done. I think it brings some much needed logistical considerations to a fairly easy place to live, and I like that about the system.


Siggy is absolutely right. Regardless of what everyone likes or doesn't like about the changes on the table, as long as there are capsuleers proposing creative solutions to the challenges presented before the Faction Warfare community, CCP has little incentive to change their course and cater to those that feel that one change or another makes things "impossible" or "hopeless".


Hans, your underhanded insults are not very fitting of your position. I don't feel Amarr is hopeless. I don't feel taking systems will be impossible. I do believe that if these changes are implemented many people who just want to fly and fight will leave. The Isk farmers will come in to replace those pilots though. Is getting the isk to replace that Dread you just lost more important to you than PVP?

My stance has always been make the changes that gets us the fights. From what I can see they are doing the opposite. Big fleets, small fleets, or solo. The incentive to plex now and kill the opposing faction will be GREAT! It will bring us fights. Not letting us dock and have assets spread around strategic systems makes for less PVP.






Sui'Djin
State War Academy
Caldari State
#308 - 2012-05-06 18:23:53 UTC
1. Glad you are watching this thread closely Hans, and post in your calm manner. Fortunately this thread is much less emotional than the testserver feedback thread, which I greatly appreciate. Continue your awesome work!

2. Maybe CCP should try a different approach concerning the station lockout and take smaller steps in this respect. There was consensus in other threads that station service denial would be preferable to a complete station lockout. And if a lockout should be needed, then this should only affect militia stations, not neutral ones.

3. Even if station lockout should be implemented (which I am definitevely opposed to), this will not break FW. There are so many workarounds (alts, Black Frog Service, POS's etc.) that it would be a nuisance, nothing more. Besides that I will at least give it a try.

4. Concerning plexing and LP stuff it looks like good advice for everybody to wait for the DevBlog that is announced for this week, and not speculate their ass off, this leads nowhere.
Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#309 - 2012-05-06 18:54:53 UTC
Sui'Djin wrote:
1. Glad you are watching this thread closely Hans, and post in your calm manner. Fortunately this thread is much less emotional than the testserver feedback thread, which I greatly appreciate. Continue your awesome work!

2. Maybe CCP should try a different approach concerning the station lockout and take smaller steps in this respect. There was consensus in other threads that station service denial would be preferable to a complete station lockout. And if a lockout should be needed, then this should only affect militia stations, not neutral ones.

3. Even if station lockout should be implemented (which I am definitevely opposed to), this will not break FW. There are so many workarounds (alts, Black Frog Service, POS's etc.) that it would be a nuisance, nothing more. Besides that I will at least give it a try.

4. Concerning plexing and LP stuff it looks like good advice for everybody to wait for the DevBlog that is announced for this week, and not speculate their ass off, this leads nowhere.


The fact that there are such simple workarounds is exactly why they should not do full station lockouts. It's purely illusory and easily avoided using the meta game. That makes it a silly, unnecessary, change.

The only reason one would do such a thing is if someone actually wants to ENCOURAGE the use of neutral alts. And the only reason I can think someone would want to do that is something I really don't want to contemplate.

Lock out station services and agents. That can't be exploited around (as easily).

Regardless, I am keeping an open mind and will wait for the devblog.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#310 - 2012-05-06 18:55:32 UTC
Damar Rocarion wrote:
Currently any of our staging systems can probably be taken by the jesus blob you can summon on saturday prime time to plex for 6 hours, nothing really factors into it. However, it seems you holding on the them is not necessarily so easy as has been show on few occasions. However, the inevitable last hour rushes will pretty much make mockery of this in all levels, no matter which side does it.
Yeah probably. Like I said, at least give some advanced warning please. We have a lot of sh** in Nenna that needs to get sorted and moved if this goes through. Or perhaps all of our Gallente/Minmatar alliances currently in based in enemy space will make a mockery of the new system and quit FW until our alts plex and reconquer our home systems. Either way. We'll adapt I'm sure.
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Of Essence
#311 - 2012-05-06 19:19:30 UTC  |  Edited by: chatgris
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
The bottom line is that neither CCP nor the CSM can advocate rules or changes that are based upon the actions capsuleers take in anticipation of a package of changes that was never set in stone, and still isn't set in stone. It's a tough pill to swallow for some, but every single patch there is a similar flurry of economic activity, and plenty of pilots have lost billions before speculating on future changes that may or may not come to pass. CCP cannot change that policy now and make Sovereignty adjustments simply because pilots moved into enemy sov space under the assumption it would magically become their own.


I don't know what the amarr/minmatar front is like, but on the gallente side the gallente have been basing out of caldari systems for YEARS. Since late 2009 IIRC. This is most definitely not something we've done recently in anticipation of sov changes.

EDIT: where is the delete button? I see X G has basically said the same thing (was playing forum catchup).
Hidden Snake
Inglorious-Basterds
#312 - 2012-05-06 19:26:20 UTC
Hrett wrote:
Sui'Djin wrote:
1. Glad you are watching this thread closely Hans, and post in your calm manner. Fortunately this thread is much less emotional than the testserver feedback thread, which I greatly appreciate. Continue your awesome work!

2. Maybe CCP should try a different approach concerning the station lockout and take smaller steps in this respect. There was consensus in other threads that station service denial would be preferable to a complete station lockout. And if a lockout should be needed, then this should only affect militia stations, not neutral ones.

3. Even if station lockout should be implemented (which I am definitevely opposed to), this will not break FW. There are so many workarounds (alts, Black Frog Service, POS's etc.) that it would be a nuisance, nothing more. Besides that I will at least give it a try.

4. Concerning plexing and LP stuff it looks like good advice for everybody to wait for the DevBlog that is announced for this week, and not speculate their ass off, this leads nowhere.


The fact that there are such simple workarounds is exactly why they should not do full station lockouts. It's purely illusory and easily avoided using the meta game. That makes it a silly, unnecessary, change.

The only reason one would do such a thing is if someone actually wants to ENCOURAGE the use of neutral alts. And the only reason I can think someone would want to do that is something I really don't want to contemplate.

Lock out station services and agents. That can't be exploited around (as easily).

Regardless, I am keeping an open mind and will wait for the devblog.


Most silly is there is nobody thinking in ccp about big scale. All these things look really like half finished nullbear ideas how lowsec could look like. Can ccp come with serious concepts for lowsec?
Mutnin
SQUIDS.
#313 - 2012-05-06 19:49:59 UTC
Sui'Djin wrote:
1. Glad you are watching this thread closely Hans, and post in your calm manner. Fortunately this thread is much less emotional than the testserver feedback thread, which I greatly appreciate. Continue your awesome work!

2. Maybe CCP should try a different approach concerning the station lockout and take smaller steps in this respect. There was consensus in other threads that station service denial would be preferable to a complete station lockout. And if a lockout should be needed, then this should only affect militia stations, not neutral ones.

3. Even if station lockout should be implemented (which I am definitevely opposed to), this will not break FW. There are so many workarounds (alts, Black Frog Service, POS's etc.) that it would be a nuisance, nothing more. Besides that I will at least give it a try.

4. Concerning plexing and LP stuff it looks like good advice for everybody to wait for the DevBlog that is announced for this week, and not speculate their ass off, this leads nowhere.



No one is really speculating, The changes are on the test server for all to see. Usually when it's this close to a patch or update the changes are how they will end up in the game when the patch goes live on Tranq. They are on the test server to be tested but they aren't gonna make major changes from what is there now with out them being on the test server.

It's less than 20 days from time the new update gets released, so they aren't gonna be changing much from what you can see on the test server aside from things they haven't added yet. It will likely just be minor tweaks if that.

IMO I'd expect to see what is on the test server right now on patch day TranQ.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#314 - 2012-05-06 21:23:35 UTC
Andiedeath wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Andiedeath wrote:


... . Why wouldn't new pilots want to join (Militia)? They will most likely have a home deep in home faction space. This will actually make FW better for new pilots and help build up the base of pilots.

I understand the Minmatar are giving the Amarr a HIDING currently. Think about it... Recruit more pilots. How do you think the Minmatar now have the numbers??? I remember only 4 months ago that roles were reversed.


I have always thought that that large null sec alliances are much easier for new pilots than faction war. They tell you how to fit your ships. The primaries are often just in alphabetical order. Nothing a noob does wrong is likely to cost a fight. They have forums with helpful information and pilots who are trying to recruit and help new players.

So to the extent this makes faction war even more of a blob to win game, this is more newb friendly. Whether it teaches newbs what is really great about eve is a different question. Now like null sec its going to involve more teaching the lemmings to swim together. The quality small scale pvpers are unlikely to have a role in the actual occupancy combat anymore.

With these changes faction war becomes like level 3 missions to null sec level 4 missions. You will basically have to do all the same sorts of grinds of null sec - just in smaller ships and for much lower pay. If I wanted to go recruiting and building connections and coodinating large fleets to grind stuff I would be in null sec going after allot bigger rewards.

I really wonder why the people that like these changes just don't go to null sec and get a much bigger return for all the "effort" and "work" they do. I ldon't mean that as any sort of insult either. Its a sincere question. Null sec is the place where you get the big returns on hard work - if that is what you want in eve.


It seems the basis of your debate is that Militia Corps are not capable (or willing) to support new pilots and helping them get the tools they need to succeed. It also suggests that Corps in Militia do not think about infrastructure to support their goals. Both these assumptions are incorrect for at least some Corps/Alliances. It is quite easy to set up a Corp like a Null Sec alliance now. Even with bully Pirate alliances like PL in our midst. All the Militias have to do is think more about the end game and what they need to do to get there.

I seem to remember an old world book chapter... Habit 2: Begin with the end in mind. Applys very well here.


I really had high hopes that ccp was going to do something good for people who like frequent quality small scale pvp. Instead we get the null sec long timers and other "hard core" blob sec mechanics.

FW used to be distinct from null sec. Comparisions didn't apply. If these changes go through FW will be null sec sov lite. Who can recruit more lemmings to blob up with?

I did not say that faction war corps are not new player friendly. Many are new player friendly. But they tend to be friendly in a way that helps pilots develop individual pilots for small gang combat not give cookie cutter instructions. The null sec alliances have been the one to spoon feed people with their ship replacement programs and fitting requirements.

Now that we know ccp is intent on making faction war more like blob sec I have to ask:

When will ccp do something for people who like frequent quality small scale pvp? Is there anything on the horizon for us or can we finally admit they will never do anything for us?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#315 - 2012-05-06 21:30:46 UTC
Sui'Djin wrote:
1. Glad you are watching this thread closely Hans, and post in your calm manner. Fortunately this thread is much less emotional than the testserver feedback thread, which I greatly appreciate. Continue your awesome work!

2. Maybe CCP should try a different approach concerning the station lockout and take smaller steps in this respect. There was consensus in other threads that station service denial would be preferable to a complete station lockout. And if a lockout should be needed, then this should only affect militia stations, not neutral ones.

3. Even if station lockout should be implemented (which I am definitevely opposed to), this will not break FW. There are so many workarounds (alts, Black Frog Service, POS's etc.) that it would be a nuisance, nothing more. Besides that I will at least give it a try.

4. Concerning plexing and LP stuff it looks like good advice for everybody to wait for the DevBlog that is announced for this week, and not speculate their ass off, this leads nowhere.



We won't be able to dock in enemy occupied systems. 40 hours is the fastest we will be able to flip a system - assuming no resistance.

There is not much more I need to hear. This system is going in the wrong direction. If you want to orbit a button for 30 hours knowing the other side doesn't even have to respond until the 39th hour and blob you out go ahead. I'm sure you will be able to carebear a lot of lp for your effort and work. Its not what I am interested in.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#316 - 2012-05-06 21:34:09 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
SigmaPi wrote:
Not that I don't agree with you on this point, but there are ways of dealing with it. You could put up a staging pos in the system you're attacking with a ship maintenance array - each corp or alliance just needs a small to get it done. I think it brings some much needed logistical considerations to a fairly easy place to live, and I like that about the system.


Siggy is absolutely right. Regardless of what everyone likes or doesn't like about the changes on the table, as long as there are capsuleers proposing creative solutions to the challenges presented before the Faction Warfare community, CCP has little incentive to change their course and cater to those that feel that one change or another makes things "impossible" or "hopeless".



Yeah thats a good idea put up a pos in a system where you know you will just get outblobbed. Why didn't white noise think of that when they were fighting goons?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
ValentinaDLM
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#317 - 2012-05-06 21:46:48 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
SigmaPi wrote:
Not that I don't agree with you on this point, but there are ways of dealing with it. You could put up a staging pos in the system you're attacking with a ship maintenance array - each corp or alliance just needs a small to get it done. I think it brings some much needed logistical considerations to a fairly easy place to live, and I like that about the system.


Siggy is absolutely right. Regardless of what everyone likes or doesn't like about the changes on the table, as long as there are capsuleers proposing creative solutions to the challenges presented before the Faction Warfare community, CCP has little incentive to change their course and cater to those that feel that one change or another makes things "impossible" or "hopeless".



Yeah thats a good idea put up a pos in a system where you know you will just get outblobbed. Why didn't white noise think of that when they were fighting goons?

I got this great new idea from that, why don't we get POSes and for each milita POS we get Sov points and the person with the most points....oh wait, this seems familiar....
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#318 - 2012-05-06 23:56:23 UTC
Hidden Snake wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:

Would CCP please re-set 0.0 sov when they finally get around to fixing that broken mechanic?


Let's be crystal clear about what we're talking about here and cut through some of the hysteria. "Sov reset" is actually a misleading and inaccurate term for what is being discussed.

Huola has always been the sovereign space of the Amarr Empire. Auga has always been the sovereign space of the Minmatar Republic. That has never once been adjusted, modified, or changed, and continuity of this fact into the May 22 expansion would not truly be a "Sov reset". The argument that CCP should reset 0.0 sovereignty is a straw-man, because we're not actually talking about CCP moving sovereignty lines, though that is how everyone is interpreting this.

What CCP proposed at Fan Fest was removing the meaningless occupancy mechanic, and giving capsuleers the ability to fight over actual Sovereignty. Many pilots made an assumption at this point, and planned efforts to reinforce their occupation in enemy sovereign space, despite the fact that CCP was saying they would be removing occupancy entirely. These pilots assumed that CCP would just arbitrarily change occupancy into Sovereignty, which would indeed be a shuffling of who has sovereignty, a forced adjustment akin to fiddling with null sec Sov as you pointed out. Saying that current Sovereignty designations will remain the same following the May 22 is not truly a "Sov reset" and therefore not some radical action akin to what you are suggesting.

The bottom line is that neither CCP nor the CSM can advocate rules or changes that are based upon the actions capsuleers take in anticipation of a package of changes that was never set in stone, and still isn't set in stone. It's a tough pill to swallow for some, but every single patch there is a similar flurry of economic activity, and plenty of pilots have lost billions before speculating on future changes that may or may not come to pass. CCP cannot change that policy now and make Sovereignty adjustments simply because pilots moved into enemy sov space under the assumption it would magically become their own.

We could debate this all day, or we can simply and see what the final package and procedure is going to be when the dev blog comes out this week. Either way, players will have almost two weeks to gird themselves for the coming war and prepare their battle plans.


Hans ... I understand u have to advocate as CSM .... However reaction of people here and in game actually shows the whole fw package is bad and it actually shows that there is no concept for low sec as a independent playground (last fun sandbox if u want). As it looks somebody in ccp wants just ruin last pieces of fun smaller scale warfare and is honestly for the first time driving me to alternative of leaving fw /disbanding no.1 caldari corp and potentially quiting eve (but as i am not ragequiter i am very careful with that)....


For me its not a matter of "rage"quitting but being rational and realizing CCP doesn't really care about frequent quality pvp, at all, and never will.

I love small scale pvp in eve. But it takes too long to find quality pvp fights in this game. 1 quality pvp fight in 2 hours is what i get on average and its pretty palthetic. I have been hopeful that CCP would adjust faction war in a way that would bring about many more quality pvp fights. I have been hanging on to this hope for much longer than any semi rational person would.

Now it seems CCP has decided faction war will not be a better source of frequent quality pvp. They just want it to be more like blobsec.

So ok what is ccp going to do for those of us who like frequent quality pvp?

Faction war was the obvious golden answer to this question and they are pissing it away. The only other option they discussed was the cheap lazy option of arenas. I hate that idea. So its unlikely that ccp will ever do anything to follow through on this dream of having frequent quality pvp. Its not a matter of "rage" quitting or emotion but a matter of finally looking at this game and ccps treatment of it rationally, and realizing they don't care about what I like.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Of Essence
#319 - 2012-05-07 00:19:56 UTC
Cearain wrote:
have been hopeful that CCP would adjust faction war in a way that would bring about many more quality pvp fights. I have been hanging on to this hope for much longer than any semi rational person would.


These words sum up the last 2 years of eve for me.
Cromwell Savage
The Screaming Seagulls
#320 - 2012-05-07 00:23:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Cromwell Savage
nvm...lol