These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

AFK Cloakers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Noisrevbus
#101 - 2012-10-01 00:21:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Noisrevbus
I can only repeat myself:

AFK cloaking exist because people use local and run to POS, short of super-idiocy that is completely safe: idiot-proof.

The best way to deal with passive cloaking is to give an incentive to active non-cloaking options. That means removing the idiot-proof by adressing things like local and hiding in POS at first notion of threat.

There's meant to be risk making ISK in nullsec: risk-reward. Industrial ships are meant to be targets: content.

So, those of you who dislike AFK cloaking:
How do you propose we go about it to make it easier to catch people in deep nullsec PvE without using a cloak?

If there are alternatives, you will see AFK cloaking losing popularity.

The problem with most complaints about AFK cloaking is that they come from people who want a risk-free PvE environment in nullsec, and you are not supposed to have that. AFK cloaking exist because current mechanics and the practise they bring about make any form of active hunting inefficient. That's why they attempt to affect you by passive gameplay, it's a reflection of your actions, your fears and your practise. You've made sure they have no other alternatives, and it's quite amusing that any "real threat" is so scarce that you complain about "potential threat", or "percieved threat".

You do understand that means it is currently "too safe" to PvE in nullsec, right? Not the other way around. Which makes the complaints about AFK cloaking from a PvE standpoint so laughable to the many players who respond to you in jeer. The same goes for any backwards reasoning regarding to PvP-them to push them out, as it assumes you can deny them targets until you can run them off at will - without any risk. It's still a risk-adversive perspective from a PvE standpoint.

You are supposed to provide them with targets, so if you dislike AFK cloaking: find a better way to provide targets.
Zyella Stormborn
Green Seekers
#102 - 2012-10-01 02:22:17 UTC
Noisrevbus wrote:
I can only repeat myself:

AFK cloaking exist because people use local and run to POS, short of super-idiocy that is completely safe: idiot-proof.

The best way to deal with passive cloaking is to give an incentive to active non-cloaking options. That means removing the idiot-proof by adressing things like local and hiding in POS at first notion of threat.

There's meant to be risk making ISK in nullsec: risk-reward. Industrial ships are meant to be targets: content.

So, those of you who dislike AFK cloaking:
How do you propose we go about it to make it easier to catch people in deep nullsec PvE without using a cloak?

If there are alternatives, you will see AFK cloaking losing popularity.

The problem with most complaints about AFK cloaking is that they come from people who want a risk-free PvE environment in nullsec, and you are not supposed to have that. AFK cloaking exist because current mechanics and the practise they bring about make any form of active hunting inefficient. That's why they attempt to affect you by passive gameplay, it's a reflection of your actions, your fears and your practise. You've made sure they have no other alternatives, and it's quite amusing that any "real threat" is so scarce that you complain about "potential threat", or "percieved threat".

You do understand that means it is currently "too safe" to PvE in nullsec, right? Not the other way around. Which makes the complaints about AFK cloaking from a PvE standpoint so laughable to the many players who respond to you in jeer. The same goes for any backwards reasoning regarding to PvP-them to push them out, as it assumes you can deny them targets until you can run them off at will - without any risk. It's still a risk-adversive perspective from a PvE standpoint.

You are supposed to provide them with targets, so if you dislike AFK cloaking: find a better way to provide targets.



I..... I agree with every single part of this. And its so very direct! Shocked

I salute you Noisrevbus. 07

~Z

There is a special Hell for people like that, Right next to child molestors, and people that talk in the theater. ~Firefly
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2012-10-01 02:35:24 UTC
Karaan S'jeth wrote:
Derath Ellecon wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Zyella Stormborn wrote:
Spam D-scan.

last time i tried D-Scan didn't show any cloaked ships warping around..... Cloaked ships just appeared from nowhere on top of the gate and jumped! Shocked

Need to recheck it today.... Maybe we finally got ability to scan cloaked ships with probes? Question


UR funny.

As far as I am aware, there is only one ship that can warp cloaked and lock immediately, which is stealth bombers. Everything else will have a 5 second targetting delay. So they will either have to decloak mid warp to be ready when they land, or they will decloak and hopefully try to bump.

Either way, if you are staying aligned etc you have a pretty darn good chance of getting out, either by catching the decloak in warp or with that 5 sec window when they decloak on grid.

I swear i never realized null bears were such a whiny bunch.

God forbid you went somewhere with no local. You wouldn't be able to leave the POS shields Shocked


obviously you never heard of a Covert Ops Cyno.


Obviously you are comparing apples and oranges. Where was I talking about hotdrops? Oh yea I wasn't. Not that a hotdrop isnt a good (but different) example.
Escomboli
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#104 - 2012-10-01 03:18:05 UTC
Annubis Lorn wrote:
ok, honestly.... AFK cloakers are chicken ***** that dont have the backbone to do any proper PvP, and im gonna go out on a limb and say that the responders to this post are exactly the pilots im refering to. And no..... havnt been a victim in HED to that bunch of FAIL ass bombers that couldnt hit a titan hung up in an asteroid belt.

The only ones that need to grow a set are the little girls that sit in a SS cloaked for hours on end because they cant fit a ship that may actually kill someone. You guys dont want it fixed because then you would have no reason to play EVE since you cant really kill anyone.




You do know there are quite a few of those "afk" cloakers that aren't really AFK at all, and have a covert cyno sitting in the high slot correct?
Raiko Osburn
Advanced Resource Acquisition and Exploration
#105 - 2012-10-01 06:17:33 UTC
Noisrevbus wrote:
I can only repeat myself:

AFK cloaking exist because people use local and run to POS, short of super-idiocy that is completely safe: idiot-proof.

The best way to deal with passive cloaking is to give an incentive to active non-cloaking options. That means removing the idiot-proof by adressing things like local and hiding in POS at first notion of threat.

There's meant to be risk making ISK in nullsec: risk-reward. Industrial ships are meant to be targets: content.

So, those of you who dislike AFK cloaking:
How do you propose we go about it to make it easier to catch people in deep nullsec PvE without using a cloak?

If there are alternatives, you will see AFK cloaking losing popularity.

The problem with most complaints about AFK cloaking is that they come from people who want a risk-free PvE environment in nullsec, and you are not supposed to have that. AFK cloaking exist because current mechanics and the practise they bring about make any form of active hunting inefficient. That's why they attempt to affect you by passive gameplay, it's a reflection of your actions, your fears and your practise. You've made sure they have no other alternatives, and it's quite amusing that any "real threat" is so scarce that you complain about "potential threat", or "percieved threat".

You do understand that means it is currently "too safe" to PvE in nullsec, right? Not the other way around. Which makes the complaints about AFK cloaking from a PvE standpoint so laughable to the many players who respond to you in jeer. The same goes for any backwards reasoning regarding to PvP-them to push them out, as it assumes you can deny them targets until you can run them off at will - without any risk. It's still a risk-adversive perspective from a PvE standpoint.

You are supposed to provide them with targets, so if you dislike AFK cloaking: find a better way to provide targets.


Well said, but ... As I said before, cloaking is not a problem. It's perfectly valid game mechanics how to catch and ambush players in null sec who are not carefull enough. Somehow I don't see it OK, when players who are not in game for couple of hours can affect its life in way AFK cloakers do. And we all know they do it simply because of effects they have on players minds.

If PVEing in null sec is almost without risks today, what is AFK cloaking? You can choose when to attack, you play dirty games with player minds. Simply let players get used to them, pick a target (yes, you can pick the target) and attack. If you are smart, you pick target you can solo easily. Or you have cyno ready and you have an agreement to get back after 10 hours of AFK, light the cyno at agreed time and let others do your pew pew job. And you do all of this, when you know players are used to you because you were not in game for couple of hours. Where is risk in this?

Compared to other null sec 'professions' AFK cloaking is way too easy.


Forget numbers, play with ideas, look for solutions.

Zyella Stormborn
Green Seekers
#106 - 2012-10-01 07:50:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Zyella Stormborn
Raiko Osburn wrote:

Compared to other null sec 'professions' AFK cloaking is way too easy.




From the little I have seen, most of null sec 'professions' are easy. It is mine, rat, and explore away with a nice relaxed setting, even easier than High Sec because there is no confusion and clutter in the Local list. If an enemy name pops up on local, everyone turtles. Few may go out and try to probe for them so they can hold a system wide gang bang on the poor guy, to chase them out of their little patch of isk making heaven. :p

AFK cloaking keeps it from being that mind numbingly simple.

I am always surprised at how right after I enter a non-blue SOV system, all the previously empty gates wind up with people camping them, and probes start going out all over the place within a few minutes, until I leave. Usually a bunch of new names (alts i am assuming) start popping up as well.

There is a special Hell for people like that, Right next to child molestors, and people that talk in the theater. ~Firefly
Noisrevbus
#107 - 2012-10-01 10:57:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Noisrevbus
Raiko Osburn wrote:

Well said, but ... As I said before, cloaking is not a problem. It's perfectly valid game mechanics how to catch and ambush players in null sec who are not carefull enough. Somehow I don't see it OK, when players who are not in game for couple of hours can affect its life in way AFK cloakers do. And we all know they do it simply because of effects they have on players minds.

If PVEing in null sec is almost without risks today, what is AFK cloaking? You can choose when to attack, you play dirty games with player minds. Simply let players get used to them, pick a target (yes, you can pick the target) and attack. If you are smart, you pick target you can solo easily. Or you have cyno ready and you have an agreement to get back after 10 hours of AFK, light the cyno at agreed time and let others do your pew pew job. And you do all of this, when you know players are used to you because you were not in game for couple of hours. Where is risk in this?


Exactly, i just don't think you realize that you do it yourself.

You are also "AFK cloaking", you just don't necessarily use a cloak.

"Appearing AFK" hidden under cloak have two effects on any other players appearing AFK in POS or elsewhere in hiding: to either keep them hiding or get players used to you so they stop going AFK and start playing again. Mark those words well: the underline is the key. It doesn't necessarily have any of those two effects on any player active in space, it assumes the player already is hiding - if they're not hiding the cloaker will never have to appear AFK to do his hunting and they are never affected by the psychological component.

Do you get it now? It's a result of targets appearing AFK themselves. It doesn't exist if people don't hide with relative safety and from there pretend to be AFK to make you go away. It works your own system: They go seemingly AFK because you go seemingly AFK. It's pointless if targets remain in space, or return to space in spontaneous and timely fashion (ie., without denying and delaying while amassing a risk-free fleet, not to fight, merely as a show of force to make sure offenders can't fight). It all reverts back to the actions of the players they affect: they play your game, you started it.

If you ever read Marlona Sky's definition of "Blobbing" that's exactly it: it's not a question of fighting when you have more numbers for relative safety, it's a question of not fighting when you don't have relative safety. It's all about not taking risks.

As such the problem isn't the "show of force" component, but the denial and delay leading up to it - the appearant AFK.

Once again, if you dislike AFK cloaking, propose how to make yourself a target. In POS shields or station dock you are not a target. If you are never outside POS shields or station dock when there are neutrals in system, you are never a neutral target (which is why awoxing, or infiltrating for blue-on-blue, exist as well). We need ships in space with neutrals nearby to have any interaction between neutrals - and we need it in a timely fashion. Appearing AFK wether it's under cloak or in POS is the same thing. You could equally say that appearing AFK in POS is psychological warfare on PvP.

Stop appearing AFK in POS if you dislike people appearing AFK under cloak.

You are right about one thing: it's never really been about cloaking. It's about people wanting more homecourt advantage, and reserving the rights to go AFK or appear so for themselves, so people don't come visit or interact. That's not balance.
Robert Lefcourt
BigPoppaMonkeys
E.B.O.L.A.
#108 - 2012-10-01 11:18:59 UTC
Cephelange du'Krevviq wrote:

It's not an exploit, nor is it unbalanced. It's an account being sustained month after month, and not generating any income or anything else productive.


No. These are often alts of holding chars, that don't have anything to do at all - so the impact on the account is negligible.


regards,

rob
Raiko Osburn
Advanced Resource Acquisition and Exploration
#109 - 2012-10-01 12:32:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Raiko Osburn
Noisrevbus wrote:


Exactly, i just don't think you realize that you do it yourself.

You are also "AFK cloaking", you just don't necessarily use a cloak.

"Appearing AFK" hidden under cloak have two effects on any other players appearing AFK in POS or elsewhere in hiding: to either keep them hiding or get players used to you so they stop going AFK and start playing again. Mark those words well: the underline is the key. It doesn't necessarily have any of those two effects on any player active in space, it assumes the player already is hiding - if they're not hiding the cloaker will never have to appear AFK to do his hunting and they are never affected by the psychological component.

Do you get it now? It's a result of targets appearing AFK themselves. It doesn't exist if people don't hide with relative safety and from there pretend to be AFK to make you go away. It works your own system: They go seemingly AFK because you go seemingly AFK. It's pointless if targets remain in space, or return to space in spontaneous and timely fashion (ie., without denying and delaying while amassing a risk-free fleet, not to fight, merely as a show of force to make sure they can't fight). It all reverts back to the actions of the players they affect: they play your game, you started it.

If you ever read Marlona Sky's definition of "Blobbing" that's exactly it: it's not a question of fighting when you have more numbers for relative safety, it's a question of not fighting when you don't have relative safety. It's all about not taking risks.

Once again, if you dislike AFK cloaking, propose how to make yourself a target. In POS shields or station dock you are not a target. If you are never outside POS shields or station dock when there are neutrals in system, you are never a neutral target (which is why awoxing, or infiltrating for blue-on-blue, exist as well). We need ships in space with neutrals nearby to have any interaction between neutrals - and we need it in a timely fashion. Appearing AFK wether it's under cloak or in POS is the same thing. You could equally say that appearing AFK in POS is psychological warfare on PvP.

Stop appearing AFK in POS if you dislike people appearing AFK under cloak.

You are right about one thing: it's never really been about cloaking. It's about people wanting more homecourt advantage, and reserving the rights to go AFK or appear so for themselves, so people don't come visit or interact. That's not balance.


I dont think you can compare it. What effect has AFK player at POS to system residents? Absolutly non as its mostly in his own (blue) system. As defender of system he plays same role and represents same threat as other players in system. And as attacker? There is no such situation as you can't sit at pos in enemy territory.

So what effect has afk player docked in station or at pos? Almost non compared to red afk cloak.

Forget numbers, play with ideas, look for solutions.

Noisrevbus
#110 - 2012-10-01 13:10:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Noisrevbus
Raiko Osburn wrote:

I dont think you can compare it. What effect has AFK player at POS to system residents? Absolutly non as its mostly in his own (blue) system. As defender of system he plays same role and represents same threat as other players in system. And as attacker? There is no such situation as you can't sit at pos in enemy territory.

So what effect has afk player docked in station or at pos? Almost non compared to red afk cloaker.

Oh and saying that players go AFK cloaked cause they dont have valid targets is an absurd argument.


A blue player in a POS have no effect on his blue friends?

... and you said my argument was absurd Roll.

He has the AFK effect on a hostile player trying to shoot him, of course! He is safely AFK or appearing to be.



A resident player hiding by cloaking, docking or entering shields, deny a visiting (neutral, hostile) player PvP targets.

If he then proceeds to go AFK or pretend to be AFK - he is "appearing AFK". Anyone can do that: PvP or PvE, resident or visitor. Appearing AFK is not a unique feature employed by cloakers in offensive PvP (so called "AFK cloakers").

Hence, appearing AFK to hostiles in a PVE ship in a POS in a system you own - is just as much "AFK cloaking".

As a strategy, "AFK cloakers" (offensive PvPers) resorts to appear AFK to you if you appear AFK to them.

If they can shoot you, they are going to shoot you.

As long as you have options to hide, they should have options to hide.



The only difference between a resident and visitor is that the resident have more options, as he own the POS and station. Both can cloak, only a defender tend to have POS or stations. That gives the defender advantages.

PvE and PvP is another dynamic. It's not impossible to shoot NPC or mine with cloaked offensive hostiles in local. It is impossible to shoot a cloaked, docked or shield-protected ship. That gives PvE advantages.

So, we should buff offensive (visiting), PvPers. Right? Isn't that what the "AFK cloakers" actually are? Visiting PvPers. So give them other options to deal with appearant AFK.

I realize ninja-PvE is an alien concept to you, but try to consider that as well (PvE while visiting a hostile system, with hostile locals and no docking - the very risk you don't dare to take).

You don't want to balance cloaking - you want more safety in defensive nullsec PvE (which is supposed to be risky).

It's absurd if you belive we don't have enough PvE safety in defensive nullsec. That's why you get laughed at.



Have some imagination and deal with the AFK cloakers in any other way than going AFK and hope they go away, or amass a show of force and expect they should be forced to leave. Play the game. Escort your PvE, devise some traps. It assumes that you interact and play with any visitor regardless of size or disposition instead of just ignoring those who don't threaten your infrastructure or push them off when you need to focus on your one war with that "other block".

Cloaking is "good" for that reason - too many other things in EVE right now is just avoidance and show of force. I realize you have trouble wrapping your head around that at the same time, because those two basic principles almost always work elsewhere: it's how Dominion SOV work, and how most "balance" still go. With cloaking it's different and that's rare.

It's pretty funny, i've actually never done AFK cloaking myself. I see the merits in it though, and in cloaking itself.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#111 - 2012-10-01 14:33:58 UTC
Derath Ellecon wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Zyella Stormborn wrote:
Spam D-scan.

last time i tried D-Scan didn't show any cloaked ships warping around..... Cloaked ships just appeared from nowhere on top of the gate and jumped! Shocked

Need to recheck it today.... Maybe we finally got ability to scan cloaked ships with probes? Question


UR funny.

As far as I am aware, there is only one ship that can warp cloaked and lock immediately, which is stealth bombers. Everything else will have a 5 second targetting delay. So they will either have to decloak mid warp to be ready when they land, or they will decloak and hopefully try to bump.

or it needs only 1 second to light cyno..... Roll

Derath Ellecon wrote:

Either way, if you are staying aligned etc you have a pretty darn good chance of getting out, either by catching the decloak in warp or with that 5 sec window when they decloak on grid.

say goodbye to your drones. Or to your friend who left for bio for a minute.

Derath Ellecon wrote:

I swear i never realized null bears were such a whiny bunch.

God forbid you went somewhere with no local. You wouldn't be able to leave the POS shields Shocked

Wh -> empire:
you know: when you leave your cave the world become bigger, stranger and more danger Shocked
Everyone starts from fear or dreamed monsters.... and one day you leave home and see: there is real dangers int the world
Cool

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Noisrevbus
#112 - 2012-10-01 14:54:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Noisrevbus
March rabbit wrote:
Say goodbye /.../ to your friend who left for bio for a minute.


What fresh hell is this?!

We can no longer leave our ships floating in deep nullsec space while we take a whizz without the risk of some unscrupulous player comming to shoot at them?

Such risks have no place in the highest risk-reward echelon - Nerf cloaking! Invoke bladder safety! Lol
Raiko Osburn
Advanced Resource Acquisition and Exploration
#113 - 2012-10-01 16:36:16 UTC
Noisrevbus wrote:
[...


Are you kidding me? If I can hide, they should be able to hide? I am done here. Just last statement. Im not against cloaks, I am against AFK cloaking in enemy territory or friendly territory without ability to see if he is AFK or NOT. I am done with you.

Forget numbers, play with ideas, look for solutions.

Dasola
New Edens Freeports
#114 - 2012-10-01 17:21:41 UTC
Personally i find all this afk cloaking whine funny. 0.0 players usually say risk vs. reward when they want something thats better then highsec/lowsec. Yet they whine a lot when that risk actually comes in system.

If you like to be safe, dont go to 0.0. nullsec is designed to be most dangerous area in game, where risks are high, but so are rewards as well. CCP didint meant 0.0 to be just boosted highsec when it comes down to rewards. 0.0 is space where players themselfs dictates the rules withing game mechanics. You have intel chanels so you hear reds comeing before they are even close. You have alliance thats suposed to be organised enough to be able to handle risks of 0.0 space ownership.

My personal view of 0.0 is this. Its the true sandbox. Risks are there, you may loose a lot. But great rewards are also there. Owning system in nullsec is not suposed to be automatic cash machine you people use to replace all those ships you loose in meaningles wars you fight, just becouse someone managed to **** off someone else.

If these afk cloak whiners are average what 0.0 players have to offer? then im not suprised anymore theres no industry in 0.0. Ho would do industry when theres a lot more easyer isk printer down there. No wonder most of 0.0 is underdeveloped and pretty much just sandbox to wannabe warlords.

Heck i call for nerfbat the 0.0, its just too damn easy there compared to rewards ;)

And before anyone claims me talking out of where sun dosent shine.. I do live in 0.0 time to time. When i feel that my alliance needs me there. In these 4 years have been playing, not much has changed in 0.0. Names of ruling class has changed a bit, but other then that, things are same as 2008 when i started playing this game.

We are Minmatar, Our ship are made of scraps, but look what our scraps can do...
The Djentleman Paulson
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#115 - 2012-10-01 18:08:19 UTC
WHY STILL THREAD DOING HERE? AFK CAMPING IN STILL FULL EFFECT
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#116 - 2012-10-01 19:03:11 UTC
Just wondering, Has an AFK Cloaked ship ever killed anyone? Im pretty sure that if someone was away from keyboard, and cloaked, and was STILL ABLE TO KILL YOU, then that guy deserves your respect for the mad epic combat skills...and you should be ashamed of yourself for being on the forums whining about someones EPIC ACCOMPLISHMENT.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Teckkx
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#117 - 2012-10-02 03:27:14 UTC
Hey whiney OP. Heres a solution to your afk cloaking problem.

You don't need max scanning skills, a set of virtues , and expensive hardwires that your worried about losing to someone that's afk. He cause you to self destruct or something ?
Nor does the cloaked ship need a 15 minute timer or cap use.

It doesn't even require millions of skill points. Just take a frigate with a mwd and fly all through out a system that's being "exploited" until you decloak the offender and then pew pew him while he can do you no harm cuz he isn't there.

To speed up the process just get more like minded people that are afriad of the afk guy, fleet up, couple supers on stamdby, a cyno ready and your ready to go.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#118 - 2012-10-02 04:20:38 UTC
March rabbit wrote:

say goodbye to your drones. Or to your friend who left for bio for a minute.


OMG NOT THE DRONES. Hopefully thats like what, a couple minutes of ratting to replace them? Are you seriously going to use the argument that you might have to leave your drones behind?

As to your friend, he's an idiot if he goes to take a bio during that time. A cloaker in system shouldn't make you have to run and hide, but you should still use some common sense.



March rabbit wrote:
Wh -> empire:
you know: when you leave your cave the world become bigger, stranger and more danger Shocked
Everyone starts from fear or dreamed monsters.... and one day you leave home and see: there is real dangers int the world
Cool


Huh? Is this supposed to even make sense?
Xpaulusx
Naari LLC
#119 - 2012-10-02 04:33:39 UTC
Annubis Lorn wrote:
Ok... I'm sure I'm not the only one that is just sick to death of these ppl.

CCP... You are always talking about fixing and balancing things... well here's an idea for you to kick around...

Personally, i feel like there should be a way to scan down cloaked ships. Require maxed out scanning skills with a full rack of scanning implants and hardwires...Make it take some time, not an instant lock.

Don't make it easy or cheap to do, but make it possible.

It's one thing when you fly around in cloaked ships from system to system, but to park your ship in an enemy system and go AFK isn't combat, it's not gameplay, it's childish and stupid, and should really be changed.

Personally i see it as a type of exploit, and it is a completely unbalanced tactic.

Of course this thread is going to be filled to max capacity with whiners and crybabys that live for nothing more than to irritate people and basically just be smarta****, but personally i feel like there should be SOME kind of an option to make an offensive move towards an AFK cloaker.

Here's a idea.... Take the auto repeat off of the cloaks... Give them a 15 min cycle time that has to be reset.

Another idea...... Make cloaks eat cap, make a cap stable cloaked ship impossible.


Ever hear the term" fight fire with fire"? P

......................................................
JackknifedII
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#120 - 2012-10-02 09:57:00 UTC
If it wasn't for local, you would have no idea they were there.

Space isn't friendly, or convenient. Live with it

Minmatar....we are generally unpleasant to be around....

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC81MDW6dFa41VdNTt-pTl1Q

Always recruiting