We have BEGGED CCP for a removal option eversince this eye cancer was brought into existence - it takes them months and months to even start polishing the lesser bugs, it should take no more then 5 lines of code to give us an option to turn them off.
Cast your mind back to when CCP added a ‘gong’ sound every time a. target was killed. How long was the turn around for that to be removed from the game?
I worry that they do not care, though almost all the content of the past 12 or so months tips this into the territory of confirming they do not care.
Its been almost 4 years of citadels. World Wars were fought and done in almost the same time, is it really that damn hard to for CCP to partially melt a telescope, stick some neon’s on it, turn it into a 3D model and call it an Observatory? Hell, one the new storms already do the anti-cloaking effect, so its not like the code isn’t already in there.
Maybe its a cynical perspective, sometimes it would be preferred if CCP just outright said “Naw, we just don’t care” so at least there was some level of honesty in the relationship.
Ok, you have me there. Feels like that’s just being intentionally difficult and forcing a ship to be bought with a fit for just that one purpose. When iHub modules got a size reduction as part of fozziesov, it at least went from needing a freighter for some of the level 5’s to get installed to needing nothing being bigger than a DTS with level 4 transport skill.hacking rigs.
Yeah, though I don’t undock so don;t really need to. The point is though that new players who pick “safer” won’t necessarily know how to do that. It just seems reasonable for the route it picks to adhere to the settings selected.
In the same way I’d expect “prefer less secure” to prefer invaded systems with a lowered sec status too.
Why would I thank you for that? It’s something that should have been there to begin with. Thanking you for CCP maybe “fix” one of their errors is absolutely inappropriate. They should thank us that we stick around despite their garbage.