These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

When NPCs become detrimental to PVP

First post
Author
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#401 - 2017-01-04 14:28:33 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Hurrduurr


Oh look, it's literally every post you've ever made all conveniently rolled into one.


No.

Its just the only word you actually read in the entire thread.


It was the perfect word, because as noted, it sums up everything you ever say quite nicely.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Salvos Rhoska
#402 - 2017-01-04 14:36:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Hurrduurr


Oh look, it's literally every post you've ever made all conveniently rolled into one.


No.

Its just the only word you actually read in the entire thread.


It was the perfect word, because as noted, it sums up everything you ever say quite nicely.


That you read everything other people write to you as "hurrduurr" might indicate you have some cognitive dysfunction.

Ofc this would explain the niveau of your responses as solely insulting and ignoring everyone that disagrees with you.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#403 - 2017-01-04 14:48:36 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Hurrduurr


Oh look, it's literally every post you've ever made all conveniently rolled into one.


No.

Its just the only word you actually read in the entire thread.


It was the perfect word, because as noted, it sums up everything you ever say quite nicely.


That you read everything other people write to you as "hurrduurr" might indicate you have some cognitive dysfunction.

Ofc this would explain the niveau of your responses as solely insulting and ignoring everyone that disagrees with you.


Other people? No, Salvos, just you, because that's all what you have to say is worth. Stop pretending like you speak for anyone but yourself.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Lena Crews
Cynosural Edge
#404 - 2017-01-04 15:10:23 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lena Crews wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lena Crews wrote:


It does.

The problem is there is only one NPC corp for one bloodline where this has an impact (Deep Core Mining/Deteis I believe). s.


Its in the pipeline that this will be applied to many more NPC corps, as well as Pirate corps (possibly differently).



I'm referring to that list.

It still only impacts one corporation that players can belong to... and they can only belong if they are one specific bloodline.

It's really simple to remove that corporation from the list with mining fleets. Problem solved.


It would seem it will be applied to a great deal more than just that 1 NPC corp.


I only noticed one NPC corp that players can join on the list. What others besides DCM are getting mining fleets?
Omar Alharazaad
New Eden Tech Support
#405 - 2017-01-04 15:12:14 UTC
None. This would be the root issue.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.

Lena Crews
Cynosural Edge
#406 - 2017-01-04 15:19:34 UTC
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
None. This would be the root issue.



I feel like one of the two primary participants in the argument here is missing that root issue.

So I'll try again.

There is NOTHING wrong with how the NPC mining fleets react to those with low standings.

The problem is simply that one bloodline of one race can belong to the NPC corp of one of those mining fleets. This grants them a protection that doesn't exist for other players.

If a have a toon in DCM... why should he be ignored by pirates who don't want to hurt their standings with DCM so they get ganked by mining fleets when my toon in the SCOPE cannot? It's not like I get the CHOICE of what NPC corp my toon goes to. It's set by the bloodline.

Simple solution... no mining fleets for DCM. Keep them for non-player NPC corps. Problem solved, little effort to the devs.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#407 - 2017-01-04 15:33:24 UTC
Lena Crews wrote:
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
None. This would be the root issue.



I feel like one of the two primary participants in the argument here is missing that root issue.

So I'll try again.

There is NOTHING wrong with how the NPC mining fleets react to those with low standings.

The problem is simply that one bloodline of one race can belong to the NPC corp of one of those mining fleets. This grants them a protection that doesn't exist for other players.

If a have a toon in DCM... why should he be ignored by pirates who don't want to hurt their standings with DCM so they get ganked by mining fleets when my toon in the SCOPE cannot? It's not like I get the CHOICE of what NPC corp my toon goes to. It's set by the bloodline.

Simple solution... no mining fleets for DCM. Keep them for non-player NPC corps. Problem solved, little effort to the devs.


That's one solution. Another would be to drop players to "no corp" when not in a player corp, and apply taxes based on their empire standings. They can still be afforded protection from wardecs as a non-corporate freelance entity, but with all the drawbacks of being in an NPC corp, like no property ownership (POCOs and the like). Another option is to give players a choice of NPC corp to join, with each one affording unique benefits and penalties (balanced of course) depending on their speciality. Another solution could be to simply remove standings loss for killing players, which is something that's bugged me since forever anyway, because it doesn't make any sense, mechanics wise. Sure, you could argue that a player corporation might drop your standings for killing their members, but the corp I just got done wardeccing, Honk Squad, are now mutually blue to each us because we had a lot of fun. Player corps have that option, to set each other blue after blowing each other up, as well as to set each other red, or just ignore each other altogether and chalk it up to "**** happens".

I only wrote out two options in the OP, because it was already long enough, and I was hoping for discussion based around recognition of the flaws, hashing out other solutions, and eventually getting CCPs attention. But now, as I said earlier, I just don't care anymore.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Lena Crews
Cynosural Edge
#408 - 2017-01-04 15:35:59 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Lena Crews wrote:
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
None. This would be the root issue.



I feel like one of the two primary participants in the argument here is missing that root issue.

So I'll try again.

There is NOTHING wrong with how the NPC mining fleets react to those with low standings.

The problem is simply that one bloodline of one race can belong to the NPC corp of one of those mining fleets. This grants them a protection that doesn't exist for other players.

If a have a toon in DCM... why should he be ignored by pirates who don't want to hurt their standings with DCM so they get ganked by mining fleets when my toon in the SCOPE cannot? It's not like I get the CHOICE of what NPC corp my toon goes to. It's set by the bloodline.

Simple solution... no mining fleets for DCM. Keep them for non-player NPC corps. Problem solved, little effort to the devs.


That's one solution. Another would be to drop players to "no corp" when not in a player corp, and apply taxes based on their empire standings. They can still be afforded protection from wardecs as a non-corporate freelance entity, but with all the drawbacks of being in an NPC corp, like no property ownership (POCOs and the like). Another option is to give players a choice of NPC corp to join, with each one affording unique benefits and penalties (balanced of course) depending on their speciality. Another solution could be to simply remove standings loss for killing players, which is something that's bugged me since forever anyway, because it doesn't make any sense, mechanics wise. Sure, you could argue that a player corporation might drop your standings for killing their members, but the corp I just got done wardeccing, Honk Squad, are now mutually blue to each us because we had a lot of fun. Player corps have that option, to set each other blue after blowing each other up, as well as to set each other red, or just ignore each other altogether and chalk it up to "**** happens".

I only wrote out two options in the OP, because it was already long enough, and I was hoping for discussion based around recognition of the flaws, hashing out other solutions, and eventually getting CCPs attention. But now, as I said earlier, I just don't care anymore.


That solution seems fairly difficult to implement. Changing the corp of NPC mining fleets seems fairly easy. Unless the CCP developers think much differently than I do when coding... probably best to go with the quick and easy solution.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#409 - 2017-01-04 15:41:27 UTC
Lena Crews wrote:


That solution seems fairly difficult to implement. Changing the corp of NPC mining fleets seems fairly easy. Unless the CCP developers think much differently than I do when coding... probably best to go with the quick and easy solution.


I agree, and it's what I suggested in my OP, I'm just offering alternatives.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Jennifer Starblaze
Fury Transport
#410 - 2017-01-04 16:31:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Jennifer Starblaze
@ramiel

You really need to learn to stop biting. While this thread is not a win for Salvos in regards to the topic at hand, it is a win for him in regards to trolling the **** out of you and forcing responses out of you.

It´s not new to anyone that people like him, post in that manner just to wind up people who oppose their opinion. We have all seen it from him and others who share his views over and over again. And sadly every time you bite and sadly even if I believe that it´s not your attention, I have the impression that you let this wind you up.

In the end it does not matter how much energy you invest, he will just keep responding in a way to wind you up. Just enjoy the game and hope that if anyone from CCP reads posts of those people are able to see through their patterns and constant contradictions. Everytime you reply to their nonsense you just motivate them to keep going as their goal simply is to trigger a respnose out of you. Even if it is hard to supress the urge to make comments against posts that are in favor of changes that ultimatly go against the nature of our beloved sandbox, it is essentially just a waste of time, they are not interested in a discussion anyway. So the best thing you can do is just state your opinion and observations and discuss them with people who actually are interested in a discussion and under no circumstances go down the route of insulting people, it just gives them ammunition to fire it back at you.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#411 - 2017-01-04 16:40:00 UTC
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
None. This would be the root issue.


And if Remy had stuck to describing that one glaring balance issue instead of ranting about "NPCs becoming detrimental to PVP" this train wreck of a thread would not have occurred the way it did.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#412 - 2017-01-04 17:00:50 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
None. This would be the root issue.


And if Remy had stuck to describing that one glaring balance issue instead of ranting about "NPCs becoming detrimental to PVP" this train wreck of a thread would not have occurred the way it did.


But then, there is no narrative...
Salvos Rhoska
#413 - 2017-01-04 17:11:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Jennifer Starblaze wrote:
@ramiel

You really need to learn to stop biting. While this thread is not a win for Salvos in regards to the topic at hand, it is a win for him in regards to trolling the **** out of you and forcing responses out of you.

It´s not new to anyone that people like him, post in that manner just to wind up people who oppose their opinion. We have all seen it from him and others who share his views over and over again. And sadly every time you bite and sadly even if I believe that it´s not your attention, I have the impression that you let this wind you up..


He has repeatedly, demonstrably, insulted and ignored the arguments of everyone that disagrees with him.
Not just me but many others.
Nobody comes even close to the incessant spew of personal insults and disrespect this guy has issued here.
That is no way to have constructive discussion.

For all intents and purposes he has wrecked his own thread, by constantly and indiscriminately insulting the hell out of participants personally, so as to drive them off. Ignoring their arguments when they are inconvenient to his purpose, so as to bury them.

He did that to himself. That is not my responsibility.
I have not trolled. I have simply taken his insults and posts for what they are, and held his face up against his own choices.

Early in this thread I repeatedly stated that I respect his attempt to raise discussion on the issue.

Little did I know that that respect would be so utterly misplaced in how he then chose to conduct himself towards the issue and other posters on it. I had expected some tit for tat, and the occasional emotional outburst or incivility, as is common on GD from most participants sooner or later, but nothing like this.

Hes actually lucky he hasnt been torn apart worse. The majority he insulted right out of the gate did not respond in kind, or just left the thread in disgust rather than lowering themselves to that level. Unfortunately, instead of dissuading him from insulting participants, this seemed to only spur him on to do more.

I imagine this thread had initially been left open because there was potential discussion to be had, but thereafter purely for the entertainment of watching Remiel self-destruct in such dramatic fashion.
Jennifer Starblaze
Fury Transport
#414 - 2017-01-04 17:54:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Jennifer Starblaze
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Jennifer Starblaze wrote:
@ramiel

You really need to learn to stop biting. While this thread is not a win for Salvos in regards to the topic at hand, it is a win for him in regards to trolling the **** out of you and forcing responses out of you.

It´s not new to anyone that people like him, post in that manner just to wind up people who oppose their opinion. We have all seen it from him and others who share his views over and over again. And sadly every time you bite and sadly even if I believe that it´s not your attention, I have the impression that you let this wind you up..


He has repeatedly, demonstrably, insulted and ignored the arguments of everyone that disagrees with him.
Not just me but many others.
Nobody comes even close to the incessant spew of personal insults and disrespect this guy has issued here.
That is no way to have constructive discussion.

For all intents and purposes he has wrecked his own thread, by constantly and indiscriminately insulting the hell out of participants personally, so as to drive them off. Ignoring their arguments when they are inconvenient to his purpose, so as to bury them.

He did that to himself. That is not my responsibility.
I have not trolled. I have simply taken his insults and posts for what they are, and held his face up against his own choices.

Early in this thread I repeatedly stated that I respect his attempt to raise discussion on the issue.

Little did I know that that respect would be so utterly misplaced in how he then chose to conduct himself towards the issue and other posters on it. I had expected some tit for tat, and the occasional emotional outburst or incivility, as is common on GD from most participants sooner or later, but nothing like this.

Hes actually lucky he hasnt been torn apart worse. The majority he insulted right out of the gate did not respond in kind, or just left the thread in disgust rather than lowering themselves to that level. Unfortunately, instead of dissuading him from insulting participants, this seemed to only spur him on to do more.

I imagine this thread had initially been left open because there was potential discussion to be had, but thereafter purely for the entertainment of watching Remiel self-destruct in such dramatic fashion.


I am gonna respond to this, but just this once.

You both acted like upset children, and your posts seem like trolling because you repeatedly kept getting stuck on things the thread was not about in the first place. Other posters did get what Ramiel was actually pointing out while you in fact misinterpreted it, or willingful do not want to see. On top of it your claim of objectivity in conjunction with stating your opinions and in fact using terms like "in my opinion" , "as I percieve it" directly contradict any claim of objectivity.

Add your constant repetitive attempts to trigger a response out of him by just repeating exactly the same over and over again, makes the impression of you just making an attempt at trolling.

Either way I have no intention of white knighting his behaviour, or the behaviour of any other people on the forums who way to often start insulting people and calling them names. And this is not just limited to him or the PvPer side, all parties way to often do that and then play the "but he started it" card, which is something that is usually used by little children.

No matter which side you are on, throwing arround insults and tantrums will never be helpful in order to have a civil discussion, no matter if you are right or not. It only ever leads to the fronts hardening.

edit: this also is the last response you will get out of me in that regard as it has as much to do with the topic itself as you two fighting with each other.

edit 2: On the topic itself, I am on Ramiel´s side on that one, but I would not get to annoyed with it. I would guess it was just an oversight from CCP´s side as it makes no sense to just have that "feature" for a single NPC corp which players can actually join. On top of it this would be a pretty significant change to player interaction itself and if it was intentional I would guess that this specific part would have been included in the dev blog. Once they are aware of that (which I hope they are now) this will hopefully get fixed.
Salvos Rhoska
#415 - 2017-01-04 18:05:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Jennifer Starblaze wrote:
I am gonna respond to this, but just this once.

You both acted like upset children, and your posts seem like trolling because you repeatadly kept getting stuck on things the thread was not about in the first place. Other posters did get what Ramiel was actually pointing out while you in fact misinterpreted it, or willingful do not want to see. On top of it your claim of objectivity in conjunction with stating your opinions and in fact using terms like "in my opinion" , "as I percieve it" directly contradict any claim of objectivity.

Add your constant repetitive attempts to trigger a response out of him by just repeating exactly the same over and over again, makes the impression of you just making an attempt at trolling.

Either way I have no intention of white knighting his behaviour, or the behaviour of any other people on the forums who way to often start insulting people and calling them names. And this is not just limited to him or the PvPer side, all parties way to often do that and then play the "but he started it" card, which is something that is usually used by little children.

No matter which side you are on, throwing arround insults and tantrums will never be helpful in order to have a civil discussion, no matter if you are right or not. It only ever leads to the fronts hardening.


What my posts "seem" like to you, is your own subjective experience. There was no trolling involved, nor do I appreciate your attempt to insinuate that there was. All of it was sincere.

The issues I debated, I see as central to the underlying mechanics proposed in this change, and integrally linked to them.
Other posters agreed with my position and its relation to the topic, thus disagreeing with Remiel, to the resulting behavior from him clear in this thread.

The objective/subjective side issue was moot and immaterial. It is a philosophical issue whether any individual can be objective, or whether any body of science can be truly objective. I am as "subjective" or "objective" as any other human being, but that again is neither here nor there in relation to the issues discussed in this thread.

I have not repeated myself even once. All of my posts are unique and specific responses to the individual posts they quote, and the context in which they are written.

What has happened in this thread is not anyone else's responsibility than Remiel's own.
There is no sharing of blame here.
He has categorically abused, disrespected and insulted participants repeatedly while refusing to acknowledge or respond to positions he disagrees with.
Galaxy Duck
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
#416 - 2017-01-04 19:08:31 UTC
Dear God, people. Get a grip.


...bunch of spergs.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#417 - 2017-01-04 19:15:39 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

That is no way to have constructive discussion.


Might I suggest you stop posting then. You've made your points, they are here earlier in the thread....so why continue?

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Zoubidah Al-Kouffarde
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#418 - 2017-01-04 19:31:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Zoubidah Al-Kouffarde
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Zoubidah Al-Kouffarde wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:


Go to low sec and find out. Learn something for a change instead of pretending you know everything.


Wow, if I go to lowsec in my positive sec status alt, while stealth scouting on my griefer char, I might bring everything I need from highsec.... such consequences :O


Low sec isn't meant to be like high sec. The PLAYERS are supposed to generate the consequences. And they do, often, but I know you don't understand this because you haven't set one foot in there, as is demonstrated by your lack of understanding of low sec and its consequences. Never mind that literally anything you go after could be a hotdrop, that the next gate you jump through could be instalocking smartbombing proteuses, or cloakies and recons could be sitting in any given sig or anom. Your problem here is you expect the game to generate the consequences. That's where we differ: I expect the PLAYERS to generate the consequences. But most players, such as yourself, are much too lazy for that kind of effort.

What I do in lowsec isn't griefing. I also only use one account, so my scouts, if any, are my friends. Do you know how to make friends? Judging by your attitude and your generally venomous posting prose, I'm going to guess no, no you don't. In any case, I will as readily shoot at ships that do shoot back as those that don't. While you cannot hold sov in lowsec, that doesn't mean you can't hold territory, and things like moons and POCOs still need defending. I don't go after miners because they're miners, I go after them because they're potential scouts/spies. Same with explorers (especially explorers), and same with ratters and PVP'ers with PVP ships. I know you really want to believe that I'm nothing but a 'filthy griefer' because it helps you 'other' me, make me seem less than you somehow, but your personal opinion of my choice of gameplay is, I assure you, completely irrelevant, especially given your demonstrable lack of understanding of EVE, and especially low security space.


LolLolLol

Absolutely hilarious meltdown of an archetypal griefer, ripe with the bold lying the griefing community is proud of. But hey, it's not lying, it's "information warfare", or meta :^)

"I don't gank miners or explorers because they can't fight back, but because they might be spies, spying on gates and stations from an asteroid field or the hacking minigame interface!"
"I don't ever ever use alts! I have FRINEDS, who do my shopping for me! also I really enjoy risk (as is evident in my ganking of PvE-fit ships) so I don't ever use an alt to scout other sides of gates, or potential fields of engagements!"
"Trust me, I wouldn't ever lie, I'm a griefer!"

"PLAYERS have to generate the consequences! Never mind that I and others use the alt system as it was intendend, to shop in high-sec without any consequences for my main griefer char, which I keep afloat in isk with my NPC corped mission runners :^) Not my fault if people are baddies and cannot find out who my alts are, even though there's zero way for them to do it ^^ "


Diane Persis wrote:


EVE is a player driven game, suddenly having NPC choose sides is against the sandbox idea.


"Sand is against the sandbox idea when it infringes on my INALIENABLE RIGHT to grief people senselessly!"

Like pottery

"You would not be the first "ganker aligned" player to be found to having some issues. Here's a dark secret: there are some in AG who, because of battling gankers, have managed to get to know a few of them, found they had issues, and helped them" HW

Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#419 - 2017-01-04 19:51:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Ayeipsia
One point, many people seem to be assuming that the mining fleets are the end result instead of the initial stages of new NPC behavior. In addition, people seem to forget or not know of the past history of NPCs in eve nor the systems in place to help deal with this already.

For example, the NPC haulers of old. They would travel from station to station in system. If killed you would take a sec hit and standing loss. You gain some random loot that at one point was valuable. They did not have defense fleets but of your empire faction Standing fell you had faction police around. The new mining fleets are an extension of this.

Also, the Diplomacy skill would solve many problems here. Unless you killed a lot of DCM players, you can train Diplomacy to improve negative standings. Heck at level 5, Diplomacy turns my -10 Gurista standing to -6. I believe you would need DCM standing below -8 to not have Diplomacy eliminate this problem.

Edited to add: if low sec is suppose to feature only player consequences, then why have gate guns? Why have it that player take a sec hit if they aggress? Those are not player driven consequence.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#420 - 2017-01-04 19:57:57 UTC
Okay, after going back and reading the thread I see Remiel as having two issues with this change. I have quoted them below.
Remiel Pollard wrote:
I'm not asking to not be attacked by rats. I'm asking that the reason they attack makes sense. Now in my OP, I did take issue with these new NPCs interfering in PVP, but reading your comments and others, I've since changed my position on this. Yes, it adds a new dynamic that I can, and already have, adapted to. But the big problem I'm having is how those negative standings came about to cause me to be KOS to DCM. link

On that note, I'm going to stand my ground on this: NPCs need to be boring and dull. The challenge of EVE needs to be the other players. The new AI was fun to play with, but it's just one of those PVE distractions that detracts from the PVP of the game.link


I agree with Remiel that the method of getting bad standings is a bit questionable. I’ve read Salvos’ view and I don’t entirely agree with it. If I do something dumb and suffer a loss, even a substantial loss, my corp mates will likely poke fun at me over it and have little to no interest in “avenging me”. Will they kill the person who imposed this loss on me if the opportunity presents itself? Sure, but not because of my earlier foolishness.

Similarly, if I am attacked by a DCM player and defeat him, losing standings with DCM seems out of place. Second of all it seems that if DCM is the only mining corporation that allows this it is indeed something of an advantage, admittedly a slight one, for those players. Preferential treatment in a game is not good. So, this should probably be addressed.

Simplest solution: everyone in DCM is moved to another NPC corp that does not have mining fleet. There Remiel’s first issue is solved and nobody gets preferential treatment.

As for Remiel’s second issue I get his argument. We don’t want the NPCs in game to be too interesting because…well…we want them to interact with other players. Yeah, that’s nice, but seems that not everyone wants to do that, and well it is as sandbox.

So here is my counter argument to Remiel. These new and better NPCs will keep some players engaged with the game…and those players are kind of like antelope—i.e. they are food for the predators. Let them be entertained by these new NPCs, but if they are doing this in LS or NS and I happen to be in local…good chance I’m hunting them. That is, whether they intended it or not…they will be my content.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online