Wow Tech Support

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Tuesday, 19 November 2013

There is no "respect number"

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
Von Keigai commented “Ganking is PVP, but PVP is not only ganking, and ganking is not a respected form. As such, you still have a lot to do. Get a real PVPer to respect you. Win a frigate battle. Just one would be a start. Then two. Yeah. Then three. Get a killboard that people must respect because it is awesome. That's your challenge. Get PVPers to respect you.”

Respect is often mentioned goal of “real PvP”. That getting a “gf” after a battle is a reward itself. Jester wrote in his PvP guide “success is rewarded with prestige, the pressing forward of larger organizational goals, financial rewards, or all three.” Since roaming PvP has no financial aspect (the loss is trivial to even an impoverished noob) and it’s not part of a campaign (not to mention that campaigns are officially to get fights as they didn’t want that region anyway), nothing but prestige left.

But there is a fundamental problem here: there is no accepted respect number. No, I’m not making the obvious point that respect is not a scientifically observable quantity like ship kill value. My point that in real life, all kind of activities that draw public respect has some form of signaling and acknowledgement system. While “bravery” and “loyalty” cannot be measured scientifically, you can get official medals in every army if you perform actions which are considered “above and beyond”. Untrue claims to be a decorated war hero is punishable crime in several countries.

The “artistic value” of a piece of artwork cannot be measured by scientific methods either. Yet there are both prizes to be earned, judged by experts and there are sites like Metacritic that collects various opinions from experts and averages this value.

Ironically, scientific value cannot be measured scientifically. You can’t say that Newton did 150 points of progression while Kepler did 62. Yet there is impact factor, counting citations (number of times other scientists found that the article was contributing to their own work) and from there, a number can be gained to measure the scientific value of a work or even the researcher.

In all cases subjective opinion of experts was formalized, netting an objectively existing medal or score that serves as a proof of merit towards the uneducated public, ending all debate. While you can argue if Joe is brave or not as that's opinionated, there is no argument over the fact that Joe got a Silver Star and a Purple Heart, proving that he was wounded in combat and his military superiors believed that he did so while performing exceptionally.

Such “PvP score” or badge could exist in the EVE community, working semi-automatically, scanning killboards for hard kills and then validating them manually. It could also work using a voting system, averaging scores given by multiple experts. Yet not even failed attempts were made to create any kind of such system. Why? Because of favoritism and the terribly easy way to cheat. Experts in the above examples were all on the same sides: members of the same army, fellow scientists, art critics. On the other hand EVE PvP-ers often belong to small groups and there is actually no group in EVE which is widely acclaimed. This is unseparable from the fact that vast majority of PvP losers refuse to accept a superior skilled opponent, claiming “outshipping”, “blobbing” or lag as reason for their defeat. Therefore the same action which is called “awesome skills” by blues of the killer, is called “gank” by everyone else.

Secondly and more importantly – unlike military heroism, art and scientific work – outstanding PvP performance can be easily cheated. Here is a solo carrier kill receiving 3200 points from zkillboard.com, due to its near impossibility, proving extraordinary skills – while in truth I simply bought this carrier from its manufacturer. I could create a titan kill report with a solo noobship if I wanted to.

Because of these reasons, “earning respect” is not simply a bad goal, but an impossible one. No matter what kind of PvP action I’d waste my time with, I would not gain an inch of respect from the public, due to lack of experts, scores and medals. There would always be a way to explain why my results doesn't count (ganking, in a blob, lucky, whatever). This of course true for everyone else. Even if you receive a “gf” from a random guy you’ll never see again, you can’t reasonably expect anyone else to respect you for it. You can spend years killing random ships without anyone taking notice or giving a damn if reminded.
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Monday, 18 November 2013

Mobile vending machine

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
CCP Fozzie requested players to give ideas about more mobile structures. The forum already has lot of good ideas. And zillions of stupid ones, half-screen quotes and other nonsense. I wish they could afford more moderators.

So hereby I introduce a genius idea, the Mobile Vending Machine. Wait, Fozzie mentioned it in his opening post? Well, I'm not sure he was serious, because it's actually great. But it should be able to do much more than simply sell mining crystals in a belt.

Like, buying ore. The structure is player owned and only he can make orders in it, according to some new trading skill. Others can complete the orders. Not too many orders of course, like 20 buy, 20 sell with maxed skill, and only one structure per player to avoid overloading the market interface. It has a beacon on the overview as it's openly broadcasting its orders, everyone can find it.

By accessing it, you can buy items it sells and sell to its buy orders from your cargohold. Now let's see its own cargohold. To be any useful, it must have huge cargohold that makes scooping impossible. I mean if you use it to buy ore in a belt, even a million m3 is filled in 11 Hulk-hours, so a mining fleet quickly renders it unusable. Also if you'd try to sell ship hulls, it wouldn't work. So scooping is out of question, if you deploy it, it stays until you either abandon it or someone destroys it. The same reinforcement method applies as the depot and it stops trading while reinforced, but the contents can be removed. It has a fuel bay where it takes cap booster 800 charges, one per hour, housing only 100. If it's out of fuel, it loses its reinforcement ability and also disappears next downtime. I think 10M m3 cargohold is enough.

To buy something, it must fit in your cargohold, with one exception: if you are in a pod, you can buy a ship hull and you get it assembled and you boarding it.

While the Mobile Vending Machine can be deployed in a belt to sell mining crystals and buy Ore, its most important feature is that it can be deployed under a POS shield, acting as a trading module for WH players. It would be revolutionary in W-space, allowing players to use formal methods of exchanging goods instead of using commonly available hangars and hope no one steals it. You could set up an ammo, fitting and small-ship store for your corp or buy their salvage, PI and ore and when you log in, just empty the cargo into your freighter and off you go down the chain to Jita.

Wouldn't this be a great structure?
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Sunday, 17 November 2013

My big problem with EVE

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
While there are thousands of different activities you can do in EVE, they be can safely classified into three groups:
  1. Farming ISK
  2. Killing random people
  3. Changing the big picture
By making 40B+/month, consistently for more than a year, I more or less won the first group. I'm not saying that there couldn't be players with higher income, or that I couldn't increase my number, but that wouldn't be much of a difference, because the numbers are already stupid and way beyond the needs of anyone in the game. If you want to earn money, the old posts about trading are still available.

By having 130B+/month kills for two months, with constant weekly increase and no signs of decline, neither a single comment predicting decline for any other reason than me getting bored, I probably set the record on multibox PvP. But even if I didn't (and someone from Marmite did), I doubt that further improvement would be meaningful. I mean if I'd kill 1/5 as much as whole Goonswarm instead of 1/10, would that be any different?

I simply can't do anything but changing a big picture without simply repeating myself, underperforming my previous results or getting meaningless improvements. That is even more of an obstacle front of trying out WH. I mean if I could get the trust of a non-fail WH corp, then what? I'd run sites for 10-15% income of what I could have in highsec and then roll holes to find someone to gank, getting 2-3% of the kills I could get in highsec. Wonderful perspective. Same with incursions, ghost sites, intelligent usage of the new structures or anything that came into my mind or was suggested in comments.

The only thing ahead of me in EVE is changing the big picture, but doing that is harder than saying. At first, it's not something that I can just join to. While I'm sure there are many who aren't satisfied by a big wallet and stupid amount of kills, they keep their goal secret to avoid public failure. Nothing was more downturning about the new South conflict than NC. announcing their escape plan (that stupid Northern Army thing) before the first shot was fired. When they got wind about a war coming, their first move was finding a way to lose without losing their face. Yes, I'm sooo motivated to join them (joining their enemies is impossible as they are Russian speaking except for BL who is officially just "helping out to get fights" and don't plan to hold sov). Oh, I almost forgot CFC who announced to join... as a third party for having fun.

And nullsec is the best part. WHs are the same mess as always, with a "don't evict PvP corps" agreement in effect to actively prevent anything worth mentioning from happening. No, ganking that blinged Moros running sites isn't worth mentioning and no one mentions it, not even the ALOD writers. Lowsec is officially a place for running around as headless chicken and killing anything that is dumb enough to not use cloak or jump drive. FW-low could be interesting if there would be sides instead of a bunch of people having farmalts in all militias, using them according to LP prices.

Highsec is place for solo play, POCOs are interesting but it seems everyone and his mother are preparing to take them, so whatever worth doing there will be done without me.

I don't deny that I feel stuck. I reached the limits of competitive play, I have enough ISK for the rest of my life and more kills that an average "PvP-er" will ever have in his lifetime, but I have no idea how to do something meaningful. So if you are up to something meaningful, something that has a chance to change New Eden, feel free to throw me an eve-mail.

PS: idiots who comment "just go and have fun" will of course be deleted. I'm maybe desperate, but not that desperate.
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Saturday, 16 November 2013

Highsec POCO ownership

Posted on 04:53 by Unknown
I usually don't make posts on Weekends, but Rubicon is upon us and the main feature, highsec POCOs need further discussion. I already wrote that the only "empire" I can think of is nothing but a price cartel and a wardec price increaser alliance, without any real alliance function.

It wasn't really popular, because people want a "real" group (corp or alliance) that actively defend POCOs. Below I prove that such entity cannot exist in a significant scale. I don't question that a group of friends can own a few POCOs in the middle of nowhere, allowing themselves to do low-tax PI, but in any significant scale, such corp cannot exist.

The main problem is - just like with nullsec moons - POCOs are a top-down income source: the money comes from taxation of the POCOs and go to the corp wallet, where the corp leadership can control it. On the other hand it needs lot of players who do the busywork of capturing and defending these POCOs. The question is why would anyone do this work to let other people get ISK?

In nullsec it's done by propaganda. The alliance leadership upholds a positive image attached to the alliance tag, and for that image, a bunch of dumb socials are doing unpaid work for them. No, reimbursement isn't a payment as you wouldn't lose your ship if you wouldn't be in their fleet. So people shoot structures in bombless bombers for hours for the ability to tell "we aren't highsec pubbies, we are Goons". People are ready to pay scam money to "goon recruiters" or join Sniggwaffe for the faint hope that one day they'll be in PL (actually, did anyone, ever got to PL from Sniggwaffe?). I can (and do) call them stupid, but they are still exist and can be exploited by smart manipulators.

This will not work in highsec, because highsec itself has no respect in the EVE community. No one will do unpaid work just to belong to a prestigious highsec corp, because such thing cannot exist. The "join friends, have fun, shoot stuff" recruitment of lolpvp organizations doesn't work either since in highsec you can't really shoot anyone but war targets.

Of course you can try to borrow the prestige of a nullsec group, by being their official highsec arm. But I wouldn't bet on this, because nullsec alliances often get into wars and need everyone there. Unlike with Sov, you need permanent presence to protect your POCOs, due to trivial logistics, lower structure HPs and less reinforcement timers. Someone can drop a dozen of 2 month old, 5M AFK Catalysts on your POCO and take it down to reinforced in less than half an hour, with trivial risks of loss. If you can't show up, you lost it.

In lack of dumb socials to be used as slave army, the members have to be paid. Any payment method can be gamed and the administration of protecting your POCOs can be a larger task than actually protecting your POCOs. Who were there, how many hours, what shiptype and above all, how much that POCO worth?

If the POCO-corp is a one-man show, such administration is not needed. You know how much it worth, and you can't cheat yourself. If you can protect it alone, you do. If you can't but the POCO worth it, you hire mercs. If you can't profitably hold it, you give it up, or sell it. Since you are already fine alone, you don't need an alliance. My original idea just added a little bonus by gaming the wardec costs.

Of course we don't have hard numbers and the whole highsec POCO thing can be unprofitable due to low utilization. Remember, there are 25000 planets, so lot of places to go for someone who doesn't want to pay your tax.
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Thursday, 14 November 2013

No way I go to WH space

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
In the recent days, after I abandoned the failed ganking project, I was a bit lost. People do stupid stuff out of desperation. I almost done one: joining a WH corp that has been asking me to time to time again.

Actually they almost got me, probably liberating me from a Moros (either by their own hands, or by the hands of their enemies) and a Slave pod. The reason I finally bugged out was being totally lost waiting for the orders. I had no idea what will happen, what is the fleet comp, what will we do, how do we get there. Sure, opsec. But in null opsec only meant I didn't know where will the op take place and maybe who will be the hostiles. I always knew what will we do and how to do it. Here, nothing. So I quit before the op took place (if there was an op at all and not just a trap for my Moros).

However the above isn't the fault of that particular WH group (assuming they wasn't just after a Moros awox), but the WH mechanics itself. Even in the lawless nullsec, there is infrastructure. There are fixed gates, stations where your stuff is safe, sites you can farm, means to move to Empire space and so on. But above all, there is market and contract system, allowing both asynchronous and secure transactions.

In a WH you can only exchange items if you are online when the other guy and if you fully trust him. Hint: if you fully trust anyone in EVE, you are a scam victim. This means you have to do everything yourself, assuming you have your own tower. But unless it's your corp, you won't get rights to manage towers. So your life is practically waiting around for being commanded and hoping that your corpmates don't screw over you.

There were boring moments during ganking. It often felt just a dumb grind. But I was always, completely under my own control. I could change what I do, do it differently or in a different space or just dock up and leave the computer. Waiting around having no idea what will happen (especially with a moderately blinged Moros), was probably the worst experience I had during playing EVE. Pulling the plug, sending that "I'm out" mail was a liberating moment.

No way I go WH space, unless I can figure out how to cooperate with people using automated and secure methods, protocols, guides and so on instead of "sit tight and do as I say". Since CCP doesn't consider WH space a priority, it's clear that I can't hope for developer help. So now I'd say with 99.99% probability that I won't be in a wormhole in my EVE life.

Anyway, as the Rubicon expansion is so Highsec focused, I think I'm already in the right place. Just have to figure out how to get something out of it.


The more I think about, the less I want to join the recent nullsec conflict either. Not because I can't really identify with either the totally fragmented SoCo, nor N3 who couldn't tie their shoes without PL who did not even declared to be in this conflict. The real reason is the altruism from the position of a pilot. Imagine that I'm a BL pilot, flying hundreds of hours of combat and finally we win and beat out N3 from South. Now what? What did I won? I can rat in the new space, sure! But I could get ratting right after paying a small sum to join one of the dozen renter alliances. What does this war offer to the winners?

So I have to find a project that is:
  1. Profitable to the participants, even if we consider the cost of opportunities widely available to people.
  2. Allow the participants to co-operate via safe and standard methods instead of blindly trusting me or each other.
  3. Has some other impact in New Eden than making us stupidly rich. (trading would cover the first two)
The best I can think of is highsec POCO domination. I see now that my original idea has the flaw of being too individualist, people want to be in a real corp, even at the cost of efficiency. I simply has to accept that some level of competency must be sacrificed in order to satisfy the social needs of people. After all, I can just block talkative people. Anyone knows of a corporation forming for highsec POCOs?
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Wednesday, 13 November 2013

Representation of women in MMOs

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
The feminist plague is upon the gaming community once again, this time against cosplayers.

I mentioned many times that I don’t like feminists, because they don’t see that the “Devil is sexist”, aka the problem source is overall horrible and sexism is its smallest issue and fixing the sexism wouldn’t make the problem significantly smaller.

So the countless feminist writers (read the Tobold article for links) are upset that women are put to display in costumes that show lot of female skin. These costumes are modeled after in-game characters who are similarly dressed, despite their job would need armor, and their male colleagues indeed wear body armor.

To see the solution, imagine that you are really a male warrior, preparing for a battle against the undead. You can die in this battle and the undead hordes can break through, run over your land, killing everyone you knew and rising them as mindless undead slaves of the evil necromancers. Would you, the young, heterosexual male prefer a young, attractive female warrior next to you to wear something really sexy? Or would you prefer her wearing proper armor so she can actually fight next to you?

Forget the rights and respect and personality of women, care only for your own needs and wishes. Who would you prefer on your side marching against the skeletal horrors? A babe wearing heels, make-up and string bikini or a muscular, scarred, barbarian woman who obviously never heard the term “hair styling” but swings a pair of large axes like they were feathers?

The problem with the MMO games is that you are not roleplaying a warrior facing the undead hordes, fighting for the survival of himself and all he loves, even if the lore says so. You are roleplaying a spoiled punk who is in perfect safety from losses and will get rewards just for showing up, regardless of his performance. The undead horde is no danger to you, so the battle capabilities of your female comrades are irrelevant.

Why were losses removed from MMOs? To make them “fun”. However by doing so, objectives were removed or made trivial. Objectives are inclusive. You win in a battle exactly the same moment when every other member of your side (save for the dead) wins. Your victory is their victory too, so you have every reason to help them win. Actions that would harm them would harm your common goal, so harm yourself too. Would you be an asshole with the spaceship pilot next to you, knowing that your alliance will need every single pilot in the upcoming war? Oh, I forgot, you didn't want that region anyway, so why not drive her away for a good laugh?

“Fun” is objectifying: the other person is just a tool to provide you personal fun. And the most obvious fun usage of a woman is as a sex toy. However, this is not sexism, a fun-oriented homosexual or a woman equally objectify young men. Also, the same objectification happens between men too, even if not in a sexual way: they should provide you company in “having fun”: laughing on your dumb jokes, bring you beer and let you win in darts.

Another serious difference is that to reach an objective, you are better off utilizing the knowledge of your teammates. Asking for their opinion, discussing with them, taking their ideas seriously increases the chances of the victory of the team. On the other hand, no one but you know what’s fun for you, so others cannot contribute with their ideas, only by mechanically following the steps you want them. For maximum fun, you should do the talking, the others should be limited to applauding you. Objectives foster discussion, fun fosters "STFU nerd".

Sexist, racist jokes and random asshattery runs rampart in “for fun” groups, while totally not tolerated in a professional place where work must be done. The stunning difference between PL FC-ed Foxcat fleets and TEST-only battlecruiser fleets still haunts me (For that reason, I really don't want to experience a frig or destroyer fleet. Ever.) If you don’t want to be subjected to sexism, racism, homophobia or general jerkiness, avoid people whose goal is to “have fun” like the bubonic plague. In gaming, avoid casual games where bad group performance is rewarded, because it openly rewards “fooling around and having fun”, at your expense of course. Look for competitive games and ambitious groups in games.

Finally a fitting joke:
Feminism is the idea that women are equal to men.
Considering how lowly the average man is, this is probably the least ambitious idea in the history.
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Tuesday, 12 November 2013

The failure of altruism

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
What went wrong with my ganking project? In one word: altruism.

It did not offer anything to the gankers in it. It did not give anything to me either as a ganker. It was started as an ambitious goal to change highsec. Had it succeeded it would still not give anything to the participants. The winners would have been those players who had learn the basics of ship fitting and the philosophy behind ganks (padding killboard), removing tears and easy targets from highsec.

Every action has opportunity cost. An hour spent ganking is an hour not spent trading. Since I've completely closed down my highsec trading for this project, it cost me more than 100B in opportunity cost. Other gankers also sacrificed some of their income for it. We got nothing for this money, just the thought that we might make something lasting in EVE, which is marketed exactly as the game where you can make difference. It was enough for me. Wasn't enough for them.

Am I somehow special to have more plans than simply fill my coffers and pad my killboard? Note: the best way to have a good personal killboard is not ganking, but whoring on blob kills. Those N3/PL pilots who were on the BL supercapital trap all got 7-800B kills in October. Practically if you were in NC. and you cared to log in, you got it, while NC. itself just had 1.45T in October. Are other people are OK with only personal goals? While most people are not on this level, claiming to be alone would be ridiculous when anyone can list names like Sindel Pellion, Chribba, there are people who spend lot of time teaching in E-UNI, those who caught SOMER doing RMT and so on. The problem is that these people obviously have different vision about what's right and what difference should be made. I never joined any of the mentioned guys for their goals, why should anyone join my goal?

Compare this with the blog which just passed 6 million visitors, individual pageviews focused on trading advices, the Undergeared project (back in WoW, WotLK I proved that the game went way too easy by doing endgame raiding in beginner gear) and the evidences that World of Tanks rigs the battles. Why does my blogging works if my ganking did not? Because it is a solo project. The blog needs no one but me. I can keep going if not a single man on the planet supports me. The ganking project needed other people to both agree with me and to be ready to do volunteer work for the idea. Now this intersection of groups proved to be too small.

There are two ways out of it: one is moving to ideas that are more mainstream. The Angel Project is a good example, it collects donations for newbies. Most people consider it a noble act. Anyone who had altruism in himself could easily find the project supportable. The other option is to make the next project non-altruist. If the participants are paid, everyone who can agree with the project can join without losing something. Hell, people who don't agree first can join for the money. This is what many commenters suggested with the ganking project too: pay the gankers in form of ships, transportation or whatever. Now, in an hour an average guy can earn about 30M ISK. A mediocre ganker can take out about 150M. So for every ISK ganked, I have to pay 0.2ISK "salary" (in some form). So to reach 2T ganks, I need to pay 400B ISK a month. I don't have that ISK. The only way if the project itself pays. If I could figure out a way to get the money as loot from the ganked miners, I would have an army under me already. But there is none, by design.

The limitation of altruism is the amount of people who both agree with a goal and willing to donate resources. A business-based idea on the other hand is self-paying. Whatever I do next, it must pay for itself.
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Monday, 11 November 2013

Thinking about highsec POCOs

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
In the next EVE patch, Rubicon, highsec customs offices will be capturable by players (actually you destroy and build your own, but it's easier to consider as capture). The NPC owner that has all the customs offices in highsec set 10% tax. Players can set it to any value, but NPC tax portion will remain, affected by a new skill.

Players owning a Customs Office can tax the users of it or use it for themselves, locking other players out. This means personal profit. The lack of personal profit while creating content is one of the plagues of EVE Online. Anything that is interesting to any other player costs you money instead of providing to you. This means the activity cannot pay itself. WoW raiding is self-paying, if your guild kills the boss, you get loot that you couldn't get anywhere else. If your EVE alliance captures a region, you get nothing. You can later use the region to rat in it, but considering the amount of time invested, you are surely better off just renting some space from someone who currently owns it. The same plagued my own failed ganking project: it provided nothing for the gankers, we did it only for the idea of fighting morons and slackers.

POCOs are different. There is money in them. The exact value can't be known, as there are lot of POCOs in low, null and WH, so looking at the Jita volume of planetary materials gives you nothing. You can only guess. The value can be trillions and can be trivial. But there is surely money in it. The problem with POCO ownership is that there are awful lot of planets in highsec, each with a Customs Office. Highsec planets aren't too good for extraction, most of the planets are used for factories, combining low level materials extracted in null/WH/low into high level materials. For that purpose, the approximately 25000 planets are created equal. While proximity to Jita is a plus, it's not that big, considering the low Red Frog prices. As they transport 1B worth of stuff 18 jumps for 10M, setting up your planet 18 jumps from Jita costs you as much as 1% tax increase. This means that if you capture a customs office and set the tax higher than the NPC tax, you probably get zero customers or just ignorant noobs who don't know better.

The only way to get profit from highsec POCOs is monopolizing them, giving no other options to PI people than going to lowsec or stopping PI besides paying your tax. Monopolizing 25000 POCOs is totally impossible due to the size of the task. Grinding down 25000 NPC customs offices is itself an inhuman job, considering their 10+2.5+2M HP. That's 363 billion HP and you can't use capitals. If you use an 1600 DPS marauder to do the job, it will take 7.2 years to kill them all. And that's without player opposition. Other players can take NPC customs offices before you, and then you can only take it if you wardec them, meaning costs, reinforcement timer and the risk of getting into PvP.

However I see a way to create the needed POCO monopoly, that fits very well to the result I've found, that solo players are extremely effective: instead of an organized monolith, having an alliance of corps. The alliance just have a formal leader, there is no real alliance life. The alliance is just a price cartel agreement. Anyone can join, as in highsec, being blue doesn't let you awox. By joining you have to set the tax rate the same as everyone. Until every NPC and non-blue customs offices are taken, there is no conflict of interest between alliance members. There is no alliance level income, you take the tax from your own POCOs.

Now comes the nasty trick while such super-large alliance can be successful. NPC customs offices can be destroyed AFK by NPC corp Marauders, easy thing. Player owned Customs Offices can only be attacked if the player corp is wardecced. You can't wardec a player owned corp if it's in an alliance, just the alliance itself. Such act has high cost if the alliance is huge, protecting the alliance from wardecs for their customs offices. I mean it's much more profitable to simply join the alliance and accept the cartel price than setting up a max-cost wardec for the chance of taking some POCOs. Remember, if you use the POCO yourself, the tax rate is irrelevant as you are paying it to yourself.

What about PvP-ers, who wardec the alliance not because they want POCOs, but to get fights? Well, they won't get any. The in-alliance corps never fight. They never even undock, except in haulers for that one trip carrying the POCO to the planet. So for their max-cost wardec they get nothing but the opportunity to shoot customs offices. How can you defend your customs offices? If anyone wardecs the alliance, it makes the war available for mercenaries, so you can just join with your shooter corp and defend your POCO.

How does the alliance attacks customs offices owned by other player corps? It doesn't. If you want to take a POCO, you grab your out-of-alliance corp and wardec the owner. This corp shoots the POCO, and when it is destroyed, your in-alliance corp plants the new POCO.

In the initial period, while there are still lot of NPC owned POCOs, the optimal tax is below the NPC tax, so players will pick the alliance POCOs, providing some income. After all customs offices are player owned, the tax can be elevated to make it 20% including perfect skills NPC tax. It is high enough to provide decent income, but low enough to not drive too many people to lowsec customs offices.

Important note: this alliance can include nullsec alliances too. I mean the nullsec alliance makes a POCO holding corp that joins the alliance for its benefits and the nullsec alliance acts as the "shooter corp", destroying non-blue POCOs and defending their POCOs by joining to the war as allies.

One question remains: how to prevent alliance members attack each other using their shooter altcorps? There is no need for such prevention. If a member is so weak and overextended that it worth paying the max-cost wardec fee and risking allies entering the war, he deserves his fate. You need to be rational with your POCOs and if you overextend, simply sell some of your POCOs, saving the shooting and getting some money. I'm sure there will be some form of POCO transfer way, if no other then selling your whole corp.

What do you think?


PS: While currently I'm thinking about this POCO monopoly, this isn't a plan declaration yet. I'm looking for options, and that includes another highsec project or going FW or WH. While nullsec is the least possible option now, I even prepare for that:
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Sunday, 10 November 2013

My project failed

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
While the last report of my ganking corp was promising, the positive summary was based on progression. Every start is hard, and compared to the first month, we clearly made serious improvement. Keeping it up for a few months would have lead us to our goal, covering all highsec, forcing miners to think before fitting a ship. While I didn't put an exact number, my guess is that 2-3T/month ganking is needed to maintain the necessary presence.

In the first 9 days of November, we reached 44.22B kills, which translates to 147B/month, a serious setback from 176B in October. But there is worse than that. Only 4.94B kills were done by gankers who are not me. 11% is a huge drop from 24% of last month. While I believe - utilizing a third ganker and now that I could use Talos - I would reach 170B monthly kills, (my October kills was 134B), but that's still just a small part of the needed 2-3T. For the corp to operate, we either need a dozen players matching my results or about a hundred players in the 5-10B/month range. Instead it seems we got a handful of casual ones. The activity in the public channel does not predict the joining of either a few whales, or a larger number of casuals. From the data available, even with the most optimistic forecasting I can't see us reaching the needed amount of ganks, so I have no choice than to declare the project a failure and discontinued.

Of course I could move the goalpost, my personal kill count is an obvious way out. The monthly average kills of the 11K members Goonswarm Federation is 1.49T, approximately 10x bigger than my personal kills. The other huge alliances have similar numbers. A single player is performing on 1/10 of alliances of several thousand "nullsec PvP-ers" is funny and probably embarrassing to some of their members who fancy themselves "killing machines". However it doesn't make any difference in EVE, as killboard numbers aren't really important. The fact that highsec ganking provides huge kill numbers was proved long ago by Freight Club. Only the original project, forcing the morons and slackers to mind the fitting of their ships would have made difference and this goal was failed.

Now what? My problem is - and always was - with EVE is the lack of goal-oriented groups. Sure they declare wishes like "X would be good to have", but if they fail to reach it, they instantly announce "we didn't want X anyway, we are just here to make explosions and have fun". Even obvious failures are laughed off. Joining or even fighting against such groups is impossible. You cannot win, nor lose in absence of goals.

Despite I'm an avid reader of state of alliance announcements, I've yet to see an explicit goal that could be mentioned a few months later and tell "you failed" or "congratulations, you made it". All I see is "we will go and pew X", which is something you cannot fail, assuming you can find the undock button. In absence of goals, you can't have a performance metric, I mean separating those who did something for the goal from those who just botted ISK.

Of course you can say that EVE is a much more casual game than WoW and people here don't want to win anything, just get drunk, roam around and explode. I've seen such players dancing naked on the postboxes, but even in WoW there was a minority who wanted to kill the big bosses. Also I don't understand why the "for fun" people are not in RvB? I mean shooting structures in bombless bombers in TiDi is not a typical source of fun. I believe they indeed have objectives, but since these objectives conflict with other player groups, someone is doomed to not reach it. And they don't have the courage that I had: standing out front and say "I failed, this project is over, we need to start something different, probably under a new leadership". Hell, the closest to that was TEST who accepted that they were beaten out of nullsec and turned into an FW alliance.

I ask commenters to inform me if there is a player group in EVE that has some in-game objectives, besides the usual bullshit "make explosions and make people mad lol". I made more explosions in the last weeks than the average "nullsec PvP-er" in a decade and I hope you don't question that ganking highsec carebears is the best way to get people mad. Been there, done that, probably better than any other ganker in the history of EVE. But I failed to make any difference. Now I wish to join - or fight against - a group that has real stakes, the real risk of defeat or victory. Do you know anyone who does that or WoW is really a more hardcore game than EVE?

I'm especially interested in organizations planning on highsec customs office domination. If I learned something during the weeks of highsec ganks is the ins and outs of highsec aggression.



There won't be more ganking-related morons, so enjoy the last one:
He went suspect to save his Mackinaw. My looter bumped him while my scout docked, refit to guns, came back to kill him. Since he couldn't break my tank with his drones, he switched to my looter, who did not aggress, just bump, so he got himself concorded with sec status loss and kill rights. Seriously? Why does an Orca pilot set his safety to yellow, not to mention red?
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Friday, 8 November 2013

The largest awox in the history of EVE

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
Awoxing is the act in EVE where a member of a team turns on his trusting teammates, destroying their ships, alone or in cooperation with other players, who are usually hostile to the original group. There are other forms of hostile actions against teammates, like dropping Sov or stealing from hangars, but they aren't called awox, that's reserved for shooting friendly ships.

What was the largest awox in the history of EVE? You probably say "the Revenant gank", when a dozen Pandemic Legion supercarriers, including a 300B rare ship, the Revenant were destroyed by Black Legion. The commander of the PL fleet was the awoxer. He
  1. formed a fleet under the guise of authority and loyalty
  2. made sure that the fleet composition is completely unable to fight against hostile players. Unsupported supers.
  3. made their fleet believe that they are just on their way for some "easy kills" without real danger, hence the above isn't a problem
  4. made sure that reds have all means to organize the death trap by giving them every intel and giving them time to form up
  5. dropped fleet and removed standard means of fleet leadership when the trap was activated. The famous quote "more than one [expletive] had a mouth", referred to the fact that someone could step up and lead, but no one could, despite they were members of probably the best PvP alliance.
While the above is a perfect example of an awox, it's not the largest in the history of EVE. Maybe the most expensive, but only because a moron used an overpriced toy. The largest awox happened recently, hence the extra Saturday post. Everything happened the same way as above, but this time not a dozen people were lured to a trap but thousands and not by a player, but by CCP employees. They
  1. formed a fleet under the guise of authority and loyalty
  2. made sure that the fleet composition is completely unable to fight against hostile players. Totally random mixture of ships of different size, range, speed, tank type.
  3. made their fleet believe that they are just on their way for some "fun event" without real danger, hence the above isn't a problem
  4. made sure that reds have all means to organize the death trap by giving them every intel (target system announced in twitter) and giving them time to form up (20 jumps in high TiDi)
  5. dropped fleet and/or refused to give fleet orders after ordering to jump into the trap. Even if someone was more competent than the PL pilots in the first example (unlikely), they couldn't speak up due to lack of comms.
Now what? Last time a player used the guise of CCP authority to hurt others (by changing the official wiki to list himself as reliable trader, despite he was a scammer), he was permabanned because his actions were making the impression that CCP is helping some players against other players. This time official employees pulled the largest awox of the history of EVE. The result can only be the same: permaban, which means firing for an employee. I'm not sure if they did it because they had alts in the nullsec groups that farmed the kills or just to have a good laugh on the griefed players, but either way, they used their CCP authority to pull the awox. If random Joe would announce a "large Empire fleet", no one would have joined it. Their official tag allowed them to lure the lambs to the slaughter.

Without firing the awoxers and reimbursing the victims (the victims of the fake-ISD-supercap trader got their supers back), there will be no way to remove the "CCP devs are working for nullsec groups" stigma.

Desclaimer: I had no ships in either fleets, my whole involvement was crossing the fleet's way in highsec for two jumps. In 10% TiDi. In a freighter. I have exhumer killmails to prove that I was busy elsewhere and I’m not a butthurt carebear whining over his own loss. Those are on the forums en masse. I'm just worried that CCP employees might steal, gank or otherwise damage me or other players using their dev powers if I'm hostile to the groups where their alts are.
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Thursday, 7 November 2013

Don't Fleet up!

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
Few days ago a member of our corp invited me into a fleet to kill a really tanked, blinged miner. Taking 8 jumps when you are -10 and your fittings are in an Orca isn’t instant. Waiting for another guy took more time. “Oh I have no insta on this station”, “Who can fly a Thrasher” and so on and so on. More time. Needless to say, the miner docked up after trolling in local.

This is the very reason why I built the whole campaign on the concept of the solo ganker. Catching that miner would have been nice. But for that chance we wasted the certain kills of several simpler ones.

You know your own limitations and can count on them. You won’t travel several jumps just to realize that you can’t fly a Thrasher. You won’t accidently notice that your fitting isn’t available. And if you do, you only held up your own dumb self, and not other people. I’ve seen enough wasted time and stupid fails in the New Order, I don’t want to recreate them.

But again, the main problem isn’t that cooperating needs time to learn. The problem is that even if the kill is successful, it cost too much in opportunity costs. Killing an Orca with the cooperation of 3 people running 5 pilots using an hour looks awesome. A 800M kill + a 500M pod yay! Except, if the same pilots would use this time to gank alone, and find nothing but average, lame Retrievers with totally average pods, they would have 5*2*(35+83) = 1.2B kills. Yes, the most basic ganking activity, killing noob retrievers provides almost as good results as an “Oh my God, Orca”.

People often ignore opportunity costs. The comment “Goons can gank in T1 catas or grind regions in Bombers because they have the menpower” is plaguing my blog. An activity always have an opportunity costs, even if you don’t care about ISK. OK, 15 mins you spend on GCC doesn’t cost 10M ISK because you wouldn’t be ratting anyway. But you could gank another target, so the cost of 10 Goons ganking the same Mack in 0.7 costs the not ganking of 5 Macks they could gank in pairs if they had a T2 Cata, skills to fly it and knowledge to pull the gank. The opportunity cost of a fleet Orca kill is a bunch of not killed solo Rets.

The key of my mindblowing 130B/month solo-dualbox kills isn’t doing something mindblowing. It’s the very opposite, doing as simple as easy form of ganking as possible: killing readily available mining barges en masse. Sometimes the best solution is the most lame and obvious. You can literally get more kill value grinding noobs in Rets than hunting down a Titan. Fun fact: if the 258 “bl” (Black Legion, but without capitals) pilots who were involved in the fight trying to kill Makalu’s titan and spent 4 hours there had went ganking Rets instead, with lame 2 ganks/hour ratio, they’d have 250B kills. And they’d still have their supercarriers.

Oh, and the miner who got away? The next day I found the fool mining in the same system in a blinged Hulk. It seems he only used that tanked Mack when gankers were about, otherwise he went for yield. I didn’t even need a Talos, a pair of T2 Catas finished him and his 2.2B pod.


The morons of the day aren't just doing something completely useless: camping the wreck of the miner in the empty ore belt, but they are doing so in a pretty numerous fleet to maximize the wasted time.
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Wednesday, 6 November 2013

Respect: the holy grail of MMOs

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
Developers and players seek what makes a good MMO. Most of them are stuck with the “fun” concept, which is fundamentally wrong. Not because “fun” is subjective and used by veldspar miners and miner-gankers alike, but because it’s an answer attempt to a different question: “what makes a good game”. “Game” is not equal to “Massively Multiplayer Online Game”. If there is a magic constellation of pixels that is universally considered fun, you just created an awesome single player game.

Adding other players to this perfect game is just a lame excuse to enforce an always-online DRM like it happened with Diablo III. The consensus of players - now accepted by Blizzard – is that the multi-player aspect of the game (trading items) made the game significantly worse.

The above means exactly what it means: the game implementation and content (“the pixels”) are relevant in creating a good game, but in no way matter in making this single player game a better MMO. The graphics quality and content amount of the MMOs of the “golden age” are laughable by the standards of today, yet they are remembered as the golden age. The remaining players of WoW are still claiming that the grindy and graphically weak (even by 2006-10 standards) Vanilla WoW and Burning Crusade were the pinnacle. Sales numbers agree.

Every MMO could be a single player game, just have a server where you are the only player. WoW leveling wouldn’t be affected, and as all players fondly remembering his first leveling, it would be a fun game, but obviously just for one run. SW:TOR built on this concept, “the fourth pillar” and got exactly as expected: lot of players for short time. I wouldn’t bet a dime on solo EVE though.

So you have a game and want to add some Holy Grail reagent that makes it an MMO that has more revenues than the single-player version. I gladly provide you that reagent: respectful interactions between players. That’s it. The player must interact with other players he respects and feel respected by that other player.

I’d like to emphasize that it’s a developer task and not a wish towards the players “please be nice and respectful”. The developer needs to govern player interactions to create this respect. EVE Online is doing surprisingly well on this, by its sandbox approach: not enforcing players to do things they don’t like just to progress their character. The frigate loller interacts with another frigate loller. While I clearly don’t respect them, they don’t have to care, because they don’t interact with me, but with each other and they consider this interaction a “good fight”.

Similarly no one is forced to be an “F1-monkey”, which is clearly a derogatory term for large-fleet pilots. But – again – they aren’t interacting with those who call them F1-monkeys, they interact with their fleetmates and hostile large-fleet pilots. The same applies for “carebears” who are happy building things together.

My widespread unpopularity in the EVE community comes not from the way I play, but from rudely intruding the spheres of other players and forcing them to interact. It applies to the miners I gank, the “skill PvP” pilots who has to read on EN24 that I have more kills than their whole corp and the large alliance-pilots who I call out for their bombless bombers and be smug about making ISK in the magnitude of their moon collection.

World of Warcraft – despite clearly being leagues better single player game than EVE – is doing horribly on the respectful interaction front. The optimal gearing path drives players to interact with players of different playstyles. Whoever figured out that the best-in-slot legendary PvE cloak needs winning PvP battlegrounds or that raid lockouts aren’t difficulty-wide (you can – therefore for optimal performance should – complete LFR even if you did heroic that week) should be forever banned from the industry and chained to a fast-food kitchen. LFR is called “looking for retards” and the feeling of players towards each other can be clearly seen from the fact that group kickvoting had to be practically removed because it was overused. In absence of kick, the behaviors that incited the kickvotes (AFK-ing, below-healer DPS or verbal abuse) became standard, making group play a hated chore for character progression for everyone. I can’t imagine anyone enjoying an LFR run, except for purposeful trolls who pull extra packs just to grief the team.

In the “golden age” of WoW the game itself was much worse, but you could completely isolate from the “noobs” or “no-lifers” and stick to your guild where other players were likely from similar background. The poison in the Wrath of Lich King expansion wasn’t the easy content, but Dungeon Finder, a tool that was optimal for getting Valor points at the cost of forcing you to interact with random players. WoW would have much better numbers not only if the game remained in BC difficulty but also if it would switch to an easy mode, chasing away all hardcore gamers, but either way having a more homogenous playerbase. 30K DPS isn’t bad on its own. It becomes bad when the other guy has 80K on a healer spec and he is in the same raid. He will see you a worthless dead weight he is forced to carry, while you will see him an abusive asshole no-lifer intruding your relaxing activity.

For future MMO developers I’d suggest to put their focus on respectful player interactions. In discussing every feature ask “will the player respect the other players he meets here”?

For Blizzard I’d suggest to immediately create different, non-merged servers for different level and type of activities. The basic, leveling server should only have 5-man, LFR and random BG features with no means to gain Valor or Conquest points. This would be the home of “for fun” players. For normal mode raiding and Valor points one has to transfer for the normal server, where the only flexible and normal raid difficulties exist, heroic scenarios and challenge mode dungeons for smaller groups. Hard mode raiding would be on a different server which has no other raiding content (but increased Valor gain from heroic bosses). Conquest-giving PvP would be yet on a different server. In these servers somewhat homogenous communities would exist for the happiness of all.

For CCP there is still room for improvement, despite already being much better than any competition in turning a game into MMO. The problematic zone is highsec: many PvP-ers are “forced” to have highsec farmalt due to highsec being the most profitable. This should be fixed. Separating highsec Sisters LP from Nullsec Sisters LP is a good start, but 50% is way too small for incentivizing PvP-ers to earn their ISK in PvP zones. I think mining or shooting rats for an hour should give 4-5x more rewards in lowsec and 10x more in nullsec/WH than it gives in highsec. This way no PvP-er is forced to be something he hates: a highsec carebear (even if "just on an alt").

On the other hand safety in highsec should be increased. I have hundreds of mails and conversations proving that PvP combat with highsec miners doesn’t increase their gaming enjoyment. They fiercely resist the idea that they should have PvP fitting (tank) on their ship, instead they believe that their ships will be safe when I “stop being a dick”. Concord response time could be decreased and concord manipulation removed, along with awoxing and wardecs, letting these players play the way they want. Remember, they are customers too and not NPCs placed there for your enjoyment. They are right that I should go away and fight with people who can fight back, but currently I have no incentive to, as I get much more kills this way (132B solo-dualbox last month), and this is a bad design: the optimal way of getting PvP results should be ... PvP-ing and not slaying miners.

On second thought, this is a good reason to gank: to force CCP to fix highsec to unprofitable and safe, like PL forced them to fix titans by AoE-doomsdaying down a carrier.

To emphasize the necessity of making player interactions be respectful for the health of the MMO, let's see two morons who choose to pull the plug as the result of interacting with me:
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Tuesday, 5 November 2013

Talons of the Talos

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
After more than a month of training, my first ganker, Botslayer Goblin learned to fly a Talos and used it to destroy a Mackinaw. While I couldn’t fit T2 blasters, the 1250DPS of the Talos was impressive. By the time this post goes up, I’ll be able to fly an 1500 DPS T2 Talos.

There are two questions about Talos ganking: when and how?

A T2 fit Talos costs about 100M, 10x more than a T2 Catalyst and its DPS is only 2x higher. Therefore Talos isn’t a cost-effective ganking method. There are two reasons to use it. The first is near stations or gates. Gateguns can pop a Catalysts way before Concord would arrive while a Talos with DCII can fire all the way. The same applies when there are gun-based (and not ECM) white knights protect the target. The other is when you simply don’t have enough pilots in your fleet to fly enough Catas.

However just because a Talos can do it while a Catalyst can’t, it doesn’t mean it should. You should only if the target worth it. It means either 200M+ fitting, or a hull+pod expectation that worth the trade of 100M ISK for a killboard value. In my Talos gank, the T2 rig fooled me. T2 rigged miners usually fly hilarious pods. If I knew that it’s just a lame 170M pod, I let him be.

While Catalyst ganks usually pay for themselves from random target drops, Talos ganks usually don’t. My main ganker has 813 kills for October. About 1/3 of them are pods. If I’d casually throw Taloses to every ship I meet, I’d be burning about 50B ISK a month, which is impossible even to my budget. This is there the “you only need to tank that much” hits. Gankers simply can’t force a kill with Taloses regularly. Not even I can.

Now to the execution. I suggest the following fit:

[Talos, Suicide]
Damage Control II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II

Alumel-Wired Sensor Augmentation, Scan Resolution Script
Tracking Computer II, Tracking speed script
Initiated Harmonic Warp Scrambler I
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I

Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Void L

Medium Hybrid Burst Aerator I
Medium Hybrid Collision Accelerator I

Acolyte II x5

Its DPS with perfect skills is above 1600. The Acolytes are chosen for their EM damage, which is typically the weakest of the targets.

Upon landing, lock, release drones, fire, scram, engage drones and wait a second before web. If the server processes web before scram, you might get unwanted results. Don’t approach or move any way, the gun tracking isn’t stellar, even with the computer. You should be able to lock a mining barge or hauler in 3 sec with the Sebo, a second sebo would give you another second, I’m not sure it worth giving up the tracking computer.

Taloses shouldn’t gank alone, since they can’t lock up pods in time and even if they could, they shouldn’t. Since a Talos is 100M and lives 25 seconds in 0.5, every second costs 4M. Do you really want to spend 6 seconds locking up a pod? They should be escorted by at least one dual-seboed Catalyst that lands after them, making sure that the Cata lives 5+ seconds after the Talos is concorded. To minimize costs, a looter should also arrive to grab what’s left after the mighty battlecruiser.

Don’t fleetwarp Taloses! They align much slower than Catas. They are best started under gatecloak, but if you undock from a station, always use instawarp. Just warp the Talos instantly as it arrives and wait with the Cata(s) until you see it warping off. Good luck, bring death and destruction to blinged, untanked fools, fill the morons of the week posts!



The anti-tear of the day was recorded in Nakugard. It seems voice populi says "if you get yourself killed, it's your fault":

While I haven't been in Nakugard for two months, the ice field is still clean:


The moron of the day is me! I warped my pod to the station with weapons timer is still on and switched to other client. Switched back for the shield sound, which is usually a bad thing for a pod. Someone so dumb deserves to lose his pod, but luck had other plans:
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Monday, 4 November 2013

Morons of the week

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
As usual the idiots are back, this time from the Oct 28 – Nov 3 period, with the important life lesson of “being dumb hurts”!

Suicide ganked shinies. I simply can’t comprehend why do people fly these. Let me give a rule of thumb: for every 100M cargo you should have 10K EHP. Since a freighter has like 150K EHP, it means 1.5B Cargo. Not 10B.
  • 8B JF, lost to Goon
  • 6B JF I wonder why Goons suicide ganked an empty JF instead of just wardeccing NC. where the dumb pilot belonged
  • 6B T1 industrial suicide ganked by a lone rail Moa. I can’t really imagine dumber way to die.
  • 6B Freighter suicide ganked,loot fairy did not approve
  • 7B Freighter, lost to BL and Pizza
  • Shuttle with 10 PLEX down with an extremely nice loot fairy
  • 5B Freighter, by BL and Pizza
  • One more
  • 6B Freighter, by FA
  • 5B, zero buffer missioner
  • 9B Freighter, by Goons
  • 6B Missioner
  • 6B Freighter, by Goons
  • 10B Freighter, by FA
  • 6B Freighter
  • 5B Freighter, by Pizza and BL
  • One more
  • 7B one by the same guys
Wardecced shiny lost (mostly to Freight Club), because flying these in NPC corp is hard. Let me be simple: if you are under wardec and undock a valuable PvE ship in highsec, you are dumb like a piece of rock.
  • 6B JF
  • 7B JF
  • 6B JF
  • 6B JF
  • 6B JF
  • 8B JF
  • 6B JF
  • 8B JF, Goons should really know better than flying a JF in highsec under their colors
  • 11B JF
  • 8B JF
  • 6B JF
  • 6B JF
  • 8B JF
  • 6B JF
  • 8B JF
Here is a special one, who considered it a good idea to travel his 3B pod in a shuttle, instead of a tanked frig which can’t be taken down by someone being bored in a Thrasher.

Finally, a raging moron from my own collection:


I hope you learned from the fate of our brainless fellows and do better!



Finally, anti-tears from the campaign of We Gank Because We Care:
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Sunday, 3 November 2013

October ganking report

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
October was a great month for my corporation, We Gank Because We Care. You can see the results on the killboard but since October was 31 days long, I decreased all data by 30/31 to be comparable to September:
  September October Change
Kills 1052 1665 +58%
Billion ISK 124.9 175.9 +41%
Average value 119M 106M -11%
Ganker pilots 3 5 +66%

Not only our performance grown greatly but with the expectation of further growth. The average kill value decreased because our new gankers have low skills, so have to pick cheaper targets. As they mature, their performance will increase without larger time commitment. The kill value distribution is partially explained by this too:
While it's clearly better than September when I made 98% of the ganks, it's still not pretty. The corp needs gankers who match my own results, which leads us to Recruitment! I made the following post on the official recruitment forum and urge my readers to join in the holy crusade against stupidity and ineffective play. Let's teach the dumb and get results that make "PvP alliances" look funny:

We Gank Because We Care is a newly formed corp but already reached stunning results:
125B destroyed in September
182B destroyed in October (killboard)

This was all done with 4 (four) players and we weren't whored on blob kills, all our kills are ours, no other corp has part in them.
• Do you want to have kills up to 100 Billion ISK a month? (I have 114B this month)
• Do you want 30+B of it totally solo kills?
• Do you want people yell "DOCK UP [you] IS IN LOCAL!!!"
• Do you want them to form dozen large fleet to catch you and fail miserably?
• Do you want to make difference in New Eden, weeding out stupidity?
• You don't want some nerd tell you when to warp, where to go, what to shoot, when to PvE but want to use your own head?
• Do you want random people send you mails thanking your work or cheering for you in local?

These are what WGBWC offering besides a teaching program that can turn a hopeless carebear who never shot at anyone into a killing machine outperforming whole PvP corps in a month.

Read our complete recruitment post and join "goblinganks" in-game channel.

How did the teaching, the ultimate goal of the corp go?
Despite I did not link the "Why was I ganked" page on any recent post, it got 7200 hits last month, all driven there by my announcements in local and in mails after ganks. So yes, people read and learn.



The typical morons, the station campers wasted some. I mean their own time. I don't even set station campers as negative contacts because they are totally harmless. One of them realized the futility of his actions and fought fire with fire, suicide ganked a railgun Talos into my looter, with Concord on grid:

Finally, more anti-tears:
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Thursday, 31 October 2013

What the Freight Club killboard tells us

Posted on 19:00 by Unknown
A piece of breaking news before the post: It seems the end has reached the RMT site Somer Blink. After receiving a 10 days closure deadline, SOMER Blink is clearing its stash while they can, offering one Billion ISK RMT-ed money for a single GTC:

I'm not sure if I dare to suggest you to take it, as you might end up negwalleted, but I surely suggest that if you have any Blink Credit, bet on anything while you can and take ships and ISK, because after the deadline Somer will probably go offline and your remaining credits will be lost. They probably sell their remaining ISK to black hat RMT sites.



Doing morons of the week articles, I noticed that most of the jump freighters that died without suicide gank died to the same corp, Freight Club. So I collected some info about them and found things you need to see.

Freight Club is a small corp. Currently 13 members and Dotlan corp stats say they were in this magnitude for years. Yet their results in terms of billion ISK destroyed are stunning:
3.24T destroyed in the pictured one year period. As comparison, Goonwaffe had 11.5T destroyed in the same period, 3.5x more. With 230x more members and by getting on kills that aren’t exclusively theirs, but made by the 30K members CFC. Stunning difference.

Out of the 50 last Anshar Jump Freighter kills 23 was their doing. From the last 50 Rheas, 29. From Arks: 20. Nomads, 16. So they are responsible for a bit less than half of the JF kills in New Eden. In other words, the rest of EVE kills barely more JFs than these handful of guys/ Their in-game page shows 61 active and one pending wars, all started by them. They are practically in war with all nullsec entities, so all they need is to wait until some idiot drives a wardecced JF into one of their scouts. Then they black-ops jump to the nearest lowsec gate and catch it, while the scout suicide tackles it.

What’s we can learn here is that a small, but competent group can get results in the magnitude of much-much larger entities. This is something everyone must consider when he tries to evaluate the landscape of EVE. The nullsec “powerhouses” are extremely inefficient both ISK and kill-wise and they are so because they can be. There isn’t real competition that could force them to step up their game.

While CCP should really address the underlying issue: you can’t start a competitor because no one will believe you aren’t a Goon/PL/whatever spy. However we, the players should not wait for Santa Claus to save us. The results of Freight Club shows that it is possible to form effective organizations despite the horrible lack of implemented security. We can do better than simply pick one of the lousy organizations, led by a Falcon-drama-queen, join and press F1 when told.


On Monday I'll post the October ganking report of my corp. While our numbers aren't as great as of Freight Club, you'll see that we have nothing to be ashamed of either. Till then, here are more anti-tears:
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Wednesday, 30 October 2013

Those smoke filled rooms

Posted on 19:00 by Unknown
There is a commonly cited problem with EVE: that all decisions are made in “smoke-filled rooms” between the same 10-15 people and no new players can enter into that arena. Have you ever considered why?

Before we’d continue, I’d like to point out that the above isn’t true. Every single player has chance to get into practically every alliance/coalition if he is persistent enough and by being there, increasing the options of the alliance leadership. If suddenly 10000 people would recognize that his true home is SOLAR fleet or Spacemonkeys Alliance, the map would change radically.

But there is a layer of truth in it. You won’t be the next The Mittani, Montolio, Vince Draken, Elo Knight or Shadoo, no matter how hard you try or how skilled you are. If we consider the infamous fails of some of them, it is surprising. I recognized the problem when I’ve read about the alt-gate. The answer “why can’t you get into the smoke filled room” is the same as “why can’t you be the next Chribba”.

I’ve been playing EVE for almost two years. I’ve never ever scammed anyone. I am pretty upfront in what I believe, no matter what others think. Yet I couldn’t start a supercap escrow service, even if I’d have much lower rates than Chribba.

The answer is “trust”. It’s not mathematically quantifiable. My scam rate is the same 0% as it’s for Chribba. Yet no one would believe me. Or more correctly no one would give me a chance. Why? Because Chribba is already there and he has proven himself. He took the position of “trustable guy” and until he leaves it, there is no other spot. It’s similar to being married. As long as you are OK in your marriage, you don’t even consider if others would be better and your wife could be replaced with gain. It only happens if your marriage is awful.

It doesn’t matter how hard Vince failed with the Falcon and how hard Elo failed when a total stranger sent him a screenshot of a PL titan with “PL Spy” literally written on it. It doesn’t matter that in these situations a 4x Civilian shield booster fit Mackinaw miner would have made a better choice. Unless they do something that makes them totally inacceptable, they stay, because they have already proven their loyalty to their group. They will not awox or steal. They earned the trust and no one gets a chance until they remove themselves from their position.

It’s not the same in the real world business. You don’t stick to the same shop until it closes or starting to sell absolutely inacceptable products. You try out other shops when they are nearby or if they have a sale. You try out new video games even when you are satisfied with your current one.

The reason is that the society enforces a level of trustworthiness on everyone. The other shop I try might have rude employees and low quality wares. But it is surely not like the shop in the Pulp Fiction where people are kidnapped into Zed’s torture chamber. They also won’t rob me and even if they sell me faulty products, I will be able to get a refund from them, because the law says so. The other video game might be lame, but surely doesn’t contain spyware. A level of decency is guaranteed, therefore I can safely try out others.

In EVE, it’s not true. Sure, X might show better judgment than Vince in the Falcon issue. But X might also be a Goon spy and Vince is surely not. X might lead our whole super fleet purposefully into a trap, while Elo only does it when he fails. X might rob anything and everything I had in the game, publish my chat logs, mails, lingerie pictures I carelessly sent him and my IP address and e-mail from the mumble server allowing people to find me in real life. There is no limit how much damage X can do to me in the game and the only thing I can do to prevent it is not trusting anyone who isn’t totally trustable, no matter how incompetent and annoying he is. Vince, Elo, Mittani and co have proven themselves in this aspect towards their group and no one in his right mind would risk a change.

Your options in EVE – unless you joined with an out of game group – are
  • Playing alone
  • Be the F1-monkey of people you know to be incompetent and asshole, but at least not spies
  • Limiting yourself to frigs and bombless bombers, so you cannot lose anything you’d care for
If you want EVE to be somewhat social game, you need to establish some basic level of trustworthiness. I do not want (and due to alts cannot) remove spying. But the list of things needed to prevent a single guy destroying everything that thousands have built are bare minimum to make EVE grow.

Until it is implemented, the only real option besides the three above is what I’m building now: a loose cooperation of solo players who share a common goal, share information but don’t share their assets and don’t follow orders.



The anti-tears of today:


As a blogger, it's always a heartwarming thing to meet a reader:
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Tuesday, 29 October 2013

Providence

Posted on 19:00 by Unknown
People complained that I demanded an Orca alt for members of the ganker corp. Well, I’ve outgrown the Orca. Of course I still use it for its 1 MWD cycle align, 250K EHP, 2.7AU/sec warp speed. It’s great to carry around fittings and loot. But not to move hulls. An Orca can carry around 23 Catalysts if it’s not carrying anything else (please don’t say to put cargo expanders on it, only suicidal morons do that). With dual-ganking, that’s used up in a few hours.

I used to Red Frog a freighter worth of hulls to some nearby system and go with the Orca to pick 23 up. But I also noticed that covering large distances during ganking increases kill count greatly. No point finding that last Retriever in this constellation if there are Mackinaws 5 jumps away! This way I could get several jumps away from my storage, making the Orca trip 15-20 mins long. That’s a gank lost.

Not anymore. I grabbed a Providence freighter and will move hulls for myself! How? Just as currently, I Red Frog a freighterload of hulls to my current base. Then I gank from there until I move. When I move, I move with my Orca filling it with fittings, loot and as many Catas I can. I move and gank. When I run off, I just jump into a shuttle, ride back to the storage, grab the Providence and move it with the hulls to my current base. If I’m 8 jumps away from my old base, I have to take 8 jumps with the Providence. With the Orca, I had to do 16 for every batch and there can be 7 batches in a freighter.

So an own Orca alt is not a convenience but a must for a ganker. Without it, you can’t move at all. The convenience is having a freighter next to it.


PS: of course it’s insured and a full load of destroyer hulls cost 180M so don’t get any ideas! The fittings are travelling in the Orca.



Some anti-tears:
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Monday, 28 October 2013

Morons of the week

Posted on 19:00 by Unknown
As promised, I’m back with the morons of the last week (Oct 21-27), in three groups.

Suicide ganked morons simply can’t learn that the buffer tank of the ship must be in line to its value:
  • 5B freighter
  • 5B, zero buffer missioning Tengu
  • 9B freighter with 7B drop
  • 5B freighter
  • 7B freighter
  • 8B missioner
  • 6B missioner
  • 6B incursion runner
  • 8B missioner
  • 5B incursion runner
  • 7B freighter
  • 6B freighter
Wardecced ones ignored the most obvious EVE advice: if it’s expensive, don’t fly it without Concord protection (or supercap blob):
  • 6B JF
  • 12B JF extra dumb, as an empty JF has a reason to take gates, but a full one could instantly jump from the undock into low/nullsec
  • 6B JF
  • This 5B thing fit best to this group, as it was in nullsec where everyone is “wardecced” and the top damage dealers were rats, so it was probably ratting. In a very-very strange and expensive fit.
  • 8B JF
  • 6B JF
  • 8B JF
  • 5B nullsec ratter
  • 8B JF
  • 6B JF
  • JF is for sissies, let’s take gates in nullsec in a 5B freighter
  • 6B JF
  • 6B JF
This week we have one super-idiot who considered it a good idea to put a scram on a mission-fit, 8B Tengu and go to nullsec to PvP.

We also have special guest morons: "a total stranger told me it will get me a titan killmail"

Finally let me share a moron I found myself: an Orca was peacefully sitting in the ice field, surrounded by its alts, rets and a Mackinaw. Maybe I shouldn’t have podded it, because the Orca pilot got mad, ejected a Caldari Navy Hookbill and started to camp my station in it. Killed my noobship! Then he went back to protect the ice field. He forgot that Caldari Navy Hookbills aren’t invincible. He also forgot to warp out his pod. The Orca which he ejected from, was now floating in the ice field all alone, so I jumped into it and drove it home:



The daily anti-tear:

Finally an anti-tear combined with an arch-moron. Bar0n Greenback lost his third mining barge and pod to me, cried more on local, but the others informed him of proper attitude:
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Sunday, 27 October 2013

Evidence that SOMER Blink is involved in botting and RMT

Posted on 19:00 by Unknown
SOMER Blink seems like a gambling site, and as all such is making money from the fools. It’s fine. How much money? They claim to give out 1250T winnings. On their site it seems that the price of all the tickets is about 30% higher than the prize. So for every 70 ISK payout they make 30M profit. That’s 535T profit.

Let’s put that money into perspective: the recent event that turned BL into bl had ISK lost about 0.15% of SOMER’s money. If you buy out all the PLEX in Jita, that money allows you to do it for almost a year. If you buy out all the tritanium, you can keep doing it for 20 years.

Where the hell is this money? I mean SOMER neither uses it to make something happen in EVE, nor it was ever stolen. No SOMER theft was ever happened. In EVE people betray their long friends for pity sums of 0.01-0.05T. A 0.1-0.5T theft gets to the top pages. Here lies 535T in the hands of an organization of dozens of people (30 got Scorpions, there must be more), and none of them ever touched it.

From 535T you can rise a 5000 strong titan fleet. SOMER could just stand behind Goons, TEST or Brave Newbies and put every member into titans. Yet no such action happened. SOMER didn’t do any significant EVE event with their money.

Where is the money? They RMT-ed it all. When you get 200M “SOMER Credit” for your GTC purchase, with the 70% payout, you win 140M ISK on average. If you buy out all the blinks of an item, you can surely cash out your 200M credits into 140M ISK. Every time you do it, SOMER must get 140M ISK to cover it. SOMER doesn’t have 535T. Whatever ISK came in was given out to those who lotteried with Blink Credits. For every GTC they sold, they had to spend 140M ISK.

How much money they made from RMT? If they get $1 for a GTC and it cost them 140M ISK, about 3.8 million dollars. This is why there are no thefts: no one steals pixel money when he can get real money. The RMT scheme is simple: if you buy PLEX from CCP and sell it, you get 600M ISK at the moment. If you buy GTC from SOMER, turn it into PLEX and sell it, you get 600+140M ISK. So they are practically selling ISK for 600/740 = 81% of the official CCP-PLEX price.

I believe SOMER Blink should be immediately banned from the game with all accounts involved as “employee”. But so far I’m just repeating Nosy Gamer (and practically every blogger and forum poster). What is the new evidence?

The interesting part isn’t how SOMER used the 535T. We believe they spent it on RMT. Maybe they didn’t. Maybe they spent it on charity or still have it in the wallet of the Somerset Mahm. It doesn’t matter. What matters is they could only gain 535T if others lost 535T. These can only be players who gambled with ISK (GTC buyers don’t put ISK into SOMER, they take out).

EVE has like 200K players. It means that the average player lost 2.7B ISK to SOMER, the price of a dreadnought. Most players can’t afford a carrier, not to gamble a dread away! Or you’d rather believe that there are whales who gambled away trillions to make up for those who never seen a billion in one place? Sure, people who can make trillions can’t figure out that the bank always wins on the lottery!

Who the hell lost 535T ISK on SOMER? Do you actually know anyone who gambled with multiple billions of ISK (instead of blink credits)? I believe that those who “lost” this ISK to SOMER are botters who were paid with real money to do so. SOMER didn’t even have to manipulate anything, if you buy 1T worth of tickets, you win 700B worth of prize, giving 300B to SOMER. Of course there are legitimate idiots who lost a couple million ISK, but they are insignificant in the books.

If you claim that SOMER is legit and not buying ISK from botters, you have to somehow prove that the average player, including yourself, your corpmates, the fools who mine veldspar to PLEX their accounts, the FW frig complex fighters, the TESTies who had more Rifters in battleship fleets than battleships, the Goons who grind structures in bombers have all lost a dreadnought to SOMER. Good luck!



The anti-tear of today:

The good news of today, another ice field cleansed:

Astesia is a busy white knight, protecting miners. He isn't a failure like Hitamino and the no-scram-Drake campers, he has a killboard full of gankers. Yet, I could pop Macks in his presence, so he choose to upship a bit when the ice field appeared:
It seems it wasn't the brightest idea.
Read More
Posted in New | No comments

Friday, 25 October 2013

Breaking news: The battle in Hadji

Posted on 11:39 by Unknown
Hadji system in Genesis lights up on Dotlan because a glorious battle was fought between the forces of light and the evil multibox-farming menace. Brave heroes of Nulli, Snigwaffe and the Sepultura corp warped a smartbombing battleship gang to the middle of the multibox-mining blob of The Wis. The battle report shows 39 badly tanked Mackinaws and their pods destroyed at the cost of 9 battleships and 3 pods. The losses of the dark side are 13-14B ISK at the cost of about 1B.

To make it better, the brave warriors who faced the overwhelming numbers posted their video of the fight. Watch this beautiful gem of small-gang PvP!



While far from being that glorious, I also found a moron who helped me contribute to the good cause with my humble means. Remember Bar0n Greenback who lost his 1B hulk+pod and then camped me for hours with no results?

He was out mining again and he got new implants!
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Thursday, 24 October 2013

Punish the rats!

Posted on 18:00 by Unknown
Imagine that in the next EVE patch, new belt rats are introduced. They spawn rarely, but when they do, they can scram and kill weaker mining barges. What would the miners do? Some would whine and cry on the forums, but most would either adjust their fits to resists the new rats or decrease its value to limit the losses if caught. But no one would go and camp the spawn point of the rat to get revenge. That would be quite stupid act considering their low bounty and loot compared to the time needed to catch one.

Highsec gankers are exactly like the mentioned rats: they arrive to a system and gank poorly fit miners, missioners, haulers. I do it for two months now. But many people do exactly what they’d never do if I was just an NPC: camp the station I’m in, follow me around trying to destroy my ships. Some even admittedly settle with slowing me down and being a minor nuisance.

Social people threat other people very differently than equally acting objects. They try to handle challenges from objects by manipulating other objects, responding to the physical threat. But when the challenging actor is a person, they get emotional and try to change its behavior instead of just responding to its physical manifestation. From begging to punishing they try to communicate with the acting person and make him stop what he is doing.

Camping my station or various belts isn’t stupid because it doesn’t even slow me down. It is stupid because it wouldn’t help them if they’d succeed! They wanted to mine. Yet they aren’t mining but camping. When they get on the Concord kill or even destroy the noobship I’m using to pull Concord, they are proudly linking “their” kills on local and cheering to each other. They feel victorious despite they didn’t mine a single piece of ore, the goal they had before I arrived.

Of course their constant failure is closely connected to the futility of their actions. I’m sure that someone who knows that a torpedo battleship or an active tanked Drake isn’t the best tool against ganking Catalysts could cause me some trouble. But someone who is smart enough to do that is smart enough to don’t waste his time for a few 5-10M Catalyst kills and maybe some fitting drops. They rather bait supercarriers instead. So competent PvP-ers ignored me and I had to settle with idiots who trade kill rights, do wardecs against -10 pilots and call it tears when informed about the futility of the above actions.

However the lack of results doesn’t deter the socials from their futile actions. They – like bots – trying to do what’s “right” and “punishing evil” is right. They also self-rewarding themselves with imaginary-emotional gains, talking about that I’m currently raging because they “locked me down”. It’s both funny and sad that I find local chat comments where they celebrate that I didn’t dare to undock all night after I left the computer running while asleep.

This is probably the most obvious symptom of being social: he acts differently if the same action is done by a person and not an inanimate object. Being rational is the opposite. I don’t care if my home is ravaged by hooligans or wild boars, I build a fence and get a gun to keep them out. Fireproof materials and sprinklers protect my home both from arsonists and electrical fire. I don’t care if my EVE ship is ganked by gatecamping players or gatecamping incursion rats, I scout for it to avoid being caught. I respond to the action, not to the actor, therefore I don’t waste my time with “revenge” that gives me noting. This is why I can make 50B income or 100B kills a month while others struggle to get their account Plexed and only have frig kills.



In the anti-tear of today, Skiff miners are celebrating the massacre of ice bots (check the kills, they are identically fit with identical implants, yet they did not warp after their alts died one by one):

The first moron of today challenged the gankers:

The second moron is a permanent one, Hitamino, who follows me around with zero results. But he is a goddamn hero!
Read More
Posted in New | No comments
Newer Posts Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Suffer mortals, as your pathetic password betrays you!
    One of the things we often don't put much thought into is password selection. Usually it is a loved-one's name or an easily remembe...
  • (I'm not) defining lowsec
    This is a rather short post, will be one more today, about my very first PvP action. Sugar reminded me of a problem that I read about a l...
  • The big EVE trick
    What is an easy game: where everyone can achieve what he wants easily. What is a hard game: where you can only advance by becoming better an...
  • You must station trade what you haul
    Well, actually you don't if you are fine with hauling for buy orders. This case you lose serious profit. If you are the station trader o...
  • The (total lack of) balance of trade of highsec
    The fact that you can be much more rich in highsec than in the competitive areas of EVE (low, null, WH) is one of my main messages. It can b...
  • Thinking about highsec POCOs
    In the next EVE patch, Rubicon, highsec customs offices will be capturable by players (actually you destroy and build your own, but it's...
  • What would happen if people could trade?
    The question of mirror-ability of strategies often comes up when I post my trading strategy. The 0.01 strategy is clearly mirror-able. If th...
  • October ganking report
    October was a great month for my corporation , We Gank Because We Care. You can see the results on the killboard but since October was 31 d...
  • The proper profit metric
    Live moron of the weekend post . Did they spent the last month under a rock? People having trouble making ISK with trading. Some rather go m...
  • ur a kid!
    The title is a troll comment I get often. It doesn't make much sense. It's clearly not an argument. While we know that socials don...

Categories

  • account
  • account theft
  • adobe
  • alpha
  • arena tournament
  • authenticator
  • authenticators
  • battle.net
  • beta
  • blizzard
  • brute force
  • cataclysm
  • diablo 3 phishing scam
  • dictionary attack
  • drive-by
  • email
  • fake
  • flash
  • game
  • Gold
  • guild
  • gumblar
  • hacked
  • hacking
  • hacks
  • Ideas
  • ISK
  • keylogger
  • march
  • mmo-champion
  • New
  • password
  • password stealing
  • patching
  • phishing
  • raiding
  • Random
  • ranks
  • remote auction house
  • scam
  • scams
  • security
  • security checklist
  • soccer
  • strong password
  • trojan
  • vulnerability
  • warcraft
  • wow
  • wowarmory
  • wowmatrix

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2013 (242)
    • ▼  November (15)
      • There is no "respect number"
      • Mobile vending machine
      • My big problem with EVE
      • Highsec POCO ownership
      • No way I go to WH space
      • Representation of women in MMOs
      • The failure of altruism
      • Thinking about highsec POCOs
      • My project failed
      • The largest awox in the history of EVE
      • Don't Fleet up!
      • Respect: the holy grail of MMOs
      • Talons of the Talos
      • Morons of the week
      • October ganking report
    • ►  October (25)
      • What the Freight Club killboard tells us
      • Those smoke filled rooms
      • Providence
      • Morons of the week
      • Evidence that SOMER Blink is involved in botting a...
      • Breaking news: The battle in Hadji
      • Punish the rats!
    • ►  September (24)
    • ►  August (21)
    • ►  July (24)
    • ►  June (22)
    • ►  May (22)
    • ►  April (22)
    • ►  March (20)
    • ►  February (21)
    • ►  January (26)
  • ►  2012 (261)
    • ►  December (24)
    • ►  November (21)
    • ►  October (24)
    • ►  September (21)
    • ►  August (26)
    • ►  July (25)
    • ►  June (20)
    • ►  May (25)
    • ►  April (23)
    • ►  March (23)
    • ►  February (23)
    • ►  January (6)
  • ►  2011 (4)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2010 (17)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ►  2009 (4)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  July (1)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile