EVE Search - The 1 isk trade order problem... with a potential solution

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Market Discussions

The 1 isk trade order problem... with a potential solution

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.16 07:06:00 - [1] The 1 isk trade order problem... with a potential So often I hear this come up. Yet to me it is not a problem but part of competition, the act of giving a better value to your customer then the competition. Yet again and again I notice people talk about "The 1 isk trade order problem" as its a problem. Example of a recent post by someone mentioning this problem. In Caleb Ayrania's post about topic "Are sleepers a threat to the player-driven market?", dated 2009.03.12 15:32:00, he says in his last sentence "...1 isk buy order problem.." I'm sure if you wanted to you can find more examples of players mentioning the issue. So why not be fair to both sides of the coin and look at the issue here. "The 0.01 isk trade order problem..." Pro's * It encourages competition to out do each other to get the customer Con's * It is annoying and time consuming, a hindrance to active traders sanity The next question is how can u encourage trade competition while limiting the annoyance factor? To answer that I look if this particular problem (or one simliar to it) has been solved already elsewhere. And yes it has, EBAY has a way to combat this exact annoyance. Its called Automatic Bidding. Basicly you set your limit and the automatic billing will adjust your price to your advantage up to your limit. Limiting the annoyance factor while still promoting competition. * In the case of sell orders it will lower the price (relative to the competition), until it reaches your lower limit you set as a automatic seller. * In the case of buy orders it will raise the price (relative to the competition), until it reaches your upper limit you set as a automatic buyer. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.16 08:26:00 - [2] Originally by: Einstein's Ghost First, this would probably put unnecessary pressure on the already slow database. First, depending on the programing this could have a lower impact on the server, as the majority of market adjustments would be done internally server side. Without manual player updates that are going on regularly now as we speak. Originally by: Einstein's Ghost Second, there is a much better solution - dont play 0.01 games. You are just offsetting the equilibration of the market forces. In my opinion this is a bad thing. Asking market traders to not do 0.01 games is silly, its like asking to stop eating. Would you prefer they do 1 isk? or 10 isk? 100isk? 1,000 isk? steps... The equilibrium you speak of is actually based off the balance between supply and demand. And as many of us know first hand demand is a liquid thing, not something set in stone. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.16 08:38:00 - [3] Originally by: Ambo I really don't think it's a problem. I 0.01 isk somtimes, other times, I won't. The problem with your solution is that it will almost totally kill the market. If a system as you describe was implemented in-game, maknig decent money from trading would become a LOT harder. The very essence of the market is competition. This would only encourage competition not destroy it. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.16 08:54:00 - [4] Originally by: Business Ethics Basically you have a solution looking for a problem here. No the problem is clearly defined. Regarding the 1 isk game. * It is annoying and time consuming, a hindrance to active traders sanity *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.16 08:57:00 - [5] Edited by: Dasfry on 16/03/2009 08:59:42 Originally by: Manalapan I think we would still have .01 ISK games....the prices would just drop really fast with implementation. If you are right about sell orders... It would also have the reverse effect on buy orders. Buy order prices would rise fast... If you think about it, the combination there of, would mean market equilibrium would be more common. As well as increased market liquidity. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.16 10:47:00 - [6] Originally by: Unbowed Ash And then 50 traders would put max ammount bid XY. System would bid to max. Then you would again have to login an put max ammount - and everyone else. Only thing this would accomplish is to destroy a price even faster. we see so many newb traders lately. Ever since MD got to top. They are destroying profit margins as it is - dont think they need any more help. From my reply to Manalapan's post. This will not destroy the market price. It would bring the sellers and buyers prices closer to a equalibrium *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.16 22:16:00 - [7] Originally by: flakeys I however agree with the change to make updating orders time limited.Once every hour or so instead of what we have now.This is better for players like me who have less playtime and also for the big trade hubs where people are actually babysitting their orders and changing them way too frequently so the prices fluctuate more then they should.Especially for sale orders. The current time minimum between edits if 5 minutes. You say it happens way too frequently then they should be. which sounds subjective. My question to you is what objectionably defines how frequent they should be? *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.16 22:20:00 - [8] Originally by: Cors Actually, the "Easy" answer is setup some sort of automated system that rotates purchases. Example. If there are 5 people selling Ravens at 90Mil, and 2 at 92 Mil, instead of showing 7 seperate sell orders, only show 2. when purchase's go through, they cycle through the sellers in the list. EG: 90 Mil sell orders. Player1 has 3 ravens @ 90Mil Player2 has 9 Ravens @ 90Mil Player3 has 1 Ravens @ 90Mil Player4 has 14 Ravens @ 90Mil Player5 has 2 Ravens @ 90Mil Each purchase by players would work down that list, distributeing the sales amongst those with the same price. This would encourage sellers to all sell at the same price. As it is, folks undercut others by .01 is or whatever to speed up their sale, becuase atm if they're all at the same price, folks just pick the one at the top. We would still get the undercutting, but those selling volume continously would have it easier as they could all set at one price, and all would get sales. Its currently setup so that at equal price, the person with the smallest volume goes first. so your list would look like. 90 Mil sell orders. Player3 has 1 Ravens @ 90Mil Player5 has 2 Ravens @ 90Mil Player1 has 3 ravens @ 90Mil Player2 has 9 Ravens @ 90Mil Player4 has 14 Ravens @ 90Mil I can only speculate at this time as to the logic behind that idea. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.16 22:24:00 - [9] Originally by: Resamo Have not read all the responses so someone has probably posted this. Wont you just have people 1 isk out bidding each others low and high ends? it would really change nothing. It works on ebay because its single item... cant work when you are placeing an order that could be filled with any number of items comeing from any number of people. Actually it can work, simply adding a new field in the advanced buying and selling window. You set how far you are willing to trade up (in case of buy orders) and trade down to (in case of sell orders) *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.16 22:27:00 - [10] Edited by: Dasfry on 16/03/2009 22:29:03 Originally by: Dzil If we introduced automatically updated bids based on neighboring bids, couldn't the customer just place bids to force yours down before selling/buying? Which means, aren't you just passing the penny isk game on to the customer? This is why you set a limit to your max. Also said customer would have to own one of said item to do it. For example if your selling charons that customer would have to own one to list it. Which means their charon potentially gets bought at that cheaper prices and they lose out on the taxes for 2 items. this setup would also effect buy order, and if the customer attempted to manipulate the price lower then the highest buy order they're item they listed would be bought up by the buy orders which is how it works now. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics

Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.16 22:31:00 - [11] Originally by: Hexxx I'd say leave the market alone...it operates very efficiently. I bet there are many players that would argue that point with you. A whole other thread would be required to cover that. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.17 05:26:00 - [12] Originally by: Zalmun Why should it change because some people are lazy or feel that it is unfair? I never said about it being unfair. I just want to give traders another tool *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.17 05:28:00 - [13] Originally by: Caleb Ayrania Current orderbook is limiting where to trade, thus the void is what makes it worthwile to place 1 isk orders.. What do you mean by order book? *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.17 05:30:00 - [14] Originally by: Selina Candor Working as intended. If a player has more time to devote to manipulating the market, more power to them. Yes, more power to them. I still see this as a add tool to existing and future traders that will help the market in the long run. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.18 07:01:00 - [15] Originally by: Amais a trader cannot leave a region if he wants to be the most efficient and a trader has to be in front of he's screen 24/7 to under/over cut other orders. This is just another tool for a trader so he does not have to be there 24/7 or 23/7. However it is not the end all solution. Again it is just another tool. Originally by: Amais The automatic bidding system is not viable, I disagree and believe it is viable. Originally by: Amais as soon as two people have their margins over each other, one of them will automatically arrive to he's maximum in a very short time. Yes, this is how it is intended to work. Then the items sell from trader 1's stock, and price falls back to the next trader 2's price limit, in relation to trader 3's price limit. Originally by: Amais As a trader, I will feel myself more confortable with just one additional information next to my order. A new coloumn which will tell me when, statistically, my order will be processed. CCP has the average number of items sold for the last weeks, they know how many people are "in front of you" with the number of items and their prices "in front of you". Thats very interesting that you want it to attempt to predict how fast your items will sell. I believe there are some already existing API programs that attempt to predict just that. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.18 07:11:00 - [16] Originally by: Frenzei I'd have to disagree on your idea, Dasfry. You are welcome to do so, And I encourage you to explain why. Originally by: Frenzei It'll lead back to an 0.1 isk game, It will not eliminate all 1 isk games. Things that have a lot of traffic and traders will still be fighting for the small margins. However many other items will benefit from this tool. Originally by: Frenzei it will create more initial work in finding the limits, then increasing your own setting until you are satisfied, and then someone else will start over. Again its optional. Its an extra tool, that traders can choose to use. Auto bidding to their advantage or avoid it and use the old method of manual single values. Originally by: Frenzei it adds tediousness to 0.01 wars. I believe the reverse. As it would not be forced on anyone. Rather it would be an optional tool. You can choose to use it or not. Thus adding more options for the trader if he/she so wishes. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.18 07:17:00 - [17] Originally by: Dzil On a side note, you would create this interesting paradox: What happens when the hidden reserves of a buy order and sell order cross, but the actual listed values don't? Does the order sell? For how much? The hidden reserve price is just that hidden. So it would not matter if they cross... It would only matter if as you say the actual listed values do. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.18 07:37:00 - [18] Originally by: Delpsi Even if the 0.01 ISK problem is a problem, this idea makes no sense. I believe it does make sense. Originally by: Delpsi It certainly isn't a solution to said problem. It helps the buyer because prices will quickly drop, but does nothing for the seller. If you only look at sell orders then yes. But this infact would effect both sell orders AND buy orders. So the gap between buying prices and selling prices would come closer to their equilibriums. Meaning the market would be closer to Perfect Competition Moving the Demand curve for products toward an elastic model. Every product will respond differently in their own way. Traders will still be able to arbitrage between different markets & take advantages of gaps in local markets. Manufactures will still be able to sell their products. Mission runners will still be able to sell their loot. Consumers will still do just that consume. Originally by: Delpsi Most likely, the sellers just end up playing the 0.01 ISK with their limits. Again same question from Frenzei, same response from me. It will not eliminate all 1 isk games. Things that have a lot of traffic and traders will still be fighting for the small margins. However many other items will benefit from this tool. As it would not be forced on anyone. Rather it would be an optional tool. You can choose to use it or not. Thus adding more options for the trader if he/she so wishes. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.18 07:42:00 - [19] Originally by: Dranakolys The market mechanics are fine, leave it alone. If CCP thought this way, we would still be using the classic Client of Eve. ex... "The game graphics are fine, leave it alone." *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.19 03:54:00 - [20] Originally by: Akita T If a customer wants to buy 20 units, the first order has a 20% chance to make a sale, the second one gets 180%, 100% chance is the max. 100% means u win the bet. if u toss a coin its 50/50, not 50/150 chances *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics

Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.19 06:21:00 - [21] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Dasfry Originally by: Akita T If a customer wants to buy 20 units, the first order has a 20% chance to make a sale, the second one gets 180%, 100% chance is the max.100% means u win the bet. if u toss a coin its 50/50, not 50/150 chances Yeah, how about you also quote the rest of the post where it says "so that's one guaranteed sale plus a 80% chance of a second sale" ? You will also notice that while the word "chance" seems to be implied, it's not actually written. You know, if you really want to be nitpicky. Being nitpicky wasn't the goal, it just wasn't clear what you where trying to say. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 06:53:00 - [22] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Sola Veritas Market manipulators would have a field day, though. If by that you mean a really tough day, yeah, sure It's no longer a game of "who can be online longer" or "who can make it look like the market is going bonkers in the opposite direction where the market is actually heading", but a game of "who can predict price movement better" and "who can afford to permanently underbid the other big competitors". Local, small scale trading wouldn't change much, if at all... the margins will just get a bit thinner. At the same time, inter-regional trading might actually make a big comeback, since inter-regional margins are bound to be better than "marketmaker" margins in a single station. I agree for the most part on what you're saying here Akita T. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:00:00 - [23] Originally by: Caleb Ayrania Same seller spilts his TRT selling as follows. 1.000.000 Units sold at 4.5 500.000 Units sold at 4.2 250.000 Units sold at 3.9 I actually practice this strategy on some of my market orders myself. It does several things, including giving the false impression that there is more competition to others then their really is. It also allows u to sell some of your order quickly, so you can work your existing funds... while at the same time the rest of your order sells at a better profit. Depending on the existing competition of course. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:02:00 - [24] Originally by: Eleri Bree There is no problem, its called a free market wherein i as a buyer get to purchase the items at the lowest avalable price. This tool would help serious traders cut out some of the tediousness of trading. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:07:00 - [25] Originally by: Ariane VoxDei Whether 0.01 footsie, as some call it, is a problem (maybe just timeconsuming annoyance) is really a matter of the average trade price of the item, and who is doing the talking: the seller or the customer. 0.01 out of 4.00 isk for trit (roughly, for arguments sake), is that a problem? No and you trade such bulks of it that 0.01 really amounts to something. So it is worth persuing even 1 cent differences. 0.01 of a 90000000.00 (90M) isk battleship, is that a problem? Yes. It is 0.000000011%. Or how about 0.01 out of a 80k a piece salvage? That could well be argued. 0.01 is not going to matter significantly out of sum like that. So when are nudges too small? At smaller than 0.01 changes to trit/pyerite, which would be less than about 1/400~ 0.2500%? Or should we say 0.01 out of the about 2isk trit price more than year ago? Which would be about 0.1250% How about just saying if it is less than 0.1000% 0.1000% of the 90M battleship above would be 90000 (90k) isk. Or is that too big? If you worry about 0.1% margin... To the buyer, one BC sized rat blown up would pay that difference, as would a number of common salvage bits (melted caps, trit bars, armor plates). So, no, customers (as in those buying from sell orders) don't give a farting spacemonkey about the 1 or 0.01 games that sellers (or buy orders) play on pricy items. Their time is too valuable to worry about microscopic margins on infrequently needed items. They think more like: does the trip time justify the lower price or is the much closer, but suboptimal price, a better deal. Look at the time issue. Even at a modest 3M/hour, it would come to 50k per minute - and newbies in a BC can make that if they salvage thier stuff. If the newbie actually thinks about it, he/she would realize that travel time frequently outweighs the benefit of a lower price. Suprisingly many don't, of course, which is part of why we have such a problem with micro-margin whining. Sellers on the other hand do care, particular the tradehub ones. Not because they care that fiercely about the 0.0000001%, but because they care that it is them getting the sale, not anyone else. To them, even a 0.0000001 isk difference, if it was possible, would matter in terms of being the one listed on top, in a trade hub where people sort by price. To them there is no margin too small. Currently the minimal change margin is 0.01 isk. I don't see any reason why we could not change this to 0.1% or a similarly low percent of your current unitprice in your market order. It would speed up the order manipulation cycle (do 0.1% ten times and you have 1% - and that can hurt on low margin trades - but do 0.01 of 100k 10 times and you still have 100k isk (999999.9 or 100000.1, depending on direction). It would not drive them as insane as the 0.01 games do, simply because they would not be changing as frequently. Either way they have to make up their mind. You can't both have the freedom to use the 0.01 games to your advantage and complain about it being used against your market orders. Push for a proportional, scaling order-change minimum, like 0.1% or some small figure like that, is my recommendation. I don't agree, with regards to changing it from being able to change your sell price 0.01 isk to instead having to do it 0.1%, percentage wise. Even if your setup was in place people could just list their item anew, at any price they wanted. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:11:00 - [26] Originally by: Hel O'Ween In a truely free market, I as a buyer, would have the right to decide from whom I buy my stuff. I would actually like to see two improvements (from a buyer's perspective) implemented in the market: - Let me decide from which order I get the goods. - Let me see who's selling the stuff. I might want to support that little newbie and pay a million more for a certain item. And I would rather not support our current war targets by buying stuff from them. This would introduce a political tool... The trade embargo. I kinda like the anonymous ability to sell items. Can you explain deeper why you'd want this? Not just the trade embargo/trade support. what other trade pro's/con's can this have? *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:15:00 - [27] Originally by: Red Wid0w Yes the 0.01 isk issue is a total joke and could be trivially fixed by CCP (by just limiting changes to 1 per hour or whatever). Even with this change you propose, the 0.01 isk game would still exist. Originally by: Red Wid0w The hilarious thing is that all the people saying "market is working like it's supposed to" are cheating macro scum. All? thats false. Originally by: Red Wid0w In case you guys did not know... people use macros to play the 0.01 isk game while they are in work. Prove it. Originally by: Red Wid0w I sincerely pity anyone that sits in front of their PC clicking on market orders all day..... Would they keep doing it if they know they were competing against bots? Yes, People actually do this. Especially when billions of isk are invested. Yes, many people would keep doing if they where competing against bots. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:24:00 - [28] Originally by: Khrillian if you value time highly just post your sell orders at the lowest price you're willing to sell at and don't modify them. No, because traders want to make the largest profit available to them. Profits encourage supply. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:27:00 - [29] Originally by: Hel O'Ween Now, from a seller's point of view I'd sometimes also would like to be able to control to whom I sell. Taking my war targets example from above: Supplying replacement parts to my enemies so that they can reequip themselves right here instead of having to go to a 'neutral' place, might keep them longer around than I'd wish to. Whats to keep your war targets from using an alt to buy supplies? or using a friend to purchase it, from you anyways? *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:28:00 - [30] Originally by: Ms Delerium - Market is already enough profitable while afk, you want to make it even easier to make isk?? Yes, more trade tools for traders. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics

Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:32:00 - [31] Originally by: Ms Delerium Finally, if limit time becomes much higher, like 12hours, it will be much worse. Taking above example, I would lead the market 5 seconds and the other dude for 11h 59m 55s and this would generate HUGE amount of hate mails and epic marketragequits No matter what time limit is set (1, 5, 10, 15, 30 mins, etc.) you can always beat the other guy, by simply having more orders then him. In your example. Just have your items split between 2 orders. And you will ALWAYS be ahead of the competitions order. The time limit has no other purpose than to keep the orders within a set speed the server can keep up with. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 07:44:00 - [32] Originally by: Tasko Pal It's worth noting that CCP is heavily pro-trader here. I'm glad. Originally by: Tasko Pal For example, automatic bidding means that an inactive trader can compete effectively in busy markets with someone that spends considerable more time online. I don't think CCP wants that. I disagree, this feature would allow people to manage many more trade orders then they could now. Using this feature would allow more traders to participate in many more markets/items than they could currently. Have you tried manually adjusting 300+ orders. Your looking at hours of just upding, and by the time you've gone through your list. Its time to update the first items on your list. So you are basicly stuck in an endless loop of updating just to have your items sell. I realize other traders solution to that is to focus on a few items. However the counter argument is don't put all your eggs in one basket. I believe if this autobidding tool where added you'd see more orders on the market. As well as more players training up skills such as Tycoon *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 20:58:00 - [33] Originally by: Business Ethics I juggle well over 2000 orders currently myself. If a single player can manage only approx 300... how in the amarr name are you able to manage 2000? how many alts are u using ? *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.26 23:24:00 - [34] Originally by: Pirva In even shorter language a bot. There are a ton of features already in game that could be argued to be defined as a bot. Here let me give you an example. The weapon aimbot When you're flying a ship, you do not manually aim the guns. Rather you give your ship target and it AUTO AIMS for you. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics
Dasfry Caldari Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.27 06:56:00 - [35] Originally by: YouGotRipped I strongly doubt that CCP will want to change the way the market operates Only CCP can answer that one. Although my impression is CCP would like to improve the game overall. Originally by: YouGotRipped ... as it will negatively affect new players. In reference to: How updating the market can negatively affect new players. I disagree, as long as the improvements are made with competitive fairness in mind. Although how you define what's competitively fair is arguable. *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation Military Tactics

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.