EVE Search - Anti-piracy

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Anti-piracy

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Teamosil Minmatar Good Time Family Band Solution	Posted - 2009.03.18 17:31:00 - [1] I'm new to Eve, so I'm curious what you guys think about this idea. It seems to me like low sec pvp is generally pretty lame. Mostly it is about pirates in throw-away ships ganging up on ships that aren't designed for combat. I don't see as many actual battles between two ships or fleets that are both combat oriented as I would have expected. Seems to me like this isn't really providing the pirates with as much fun as they would like, and the mechanics of security status seem to force the combat in low sec to remain one sided. It's more like PvBarges than PvP. What I would really like to see is for low sec to be a viable place for real PvP. I think the way to do this would be to make anti-piracy more sustainable. Right now, the mechanics don't really allow anti-piracy. If you attack pirates, pretty soon your security status drops and you pretty much just become a pirate that is too dumb to attack easy targets. If you preserve your security status by never attacking first, you probably won't see much action and you'll be at a big disadvantage when you do. So, my suggestion is to change the low sec security status mechanics to allow pilots with a security over 2.0 to attack pilots with security statuses below -2.0 without suffering a drop in their own security status. My thinking is that this would liven up low sec and result in more opportunities for decent pvp there. Also, I know whenever anybody posts about piracy, they get flamed... Feel free if you like, but my goal here isn't a piracy nerf, it's to make piracy, and anti-piracy, more fun. Anyways, I'm new, so there may well be problems with that idea, but what do you guys think?
xena zena freelancers inc KenZoku	Posted - 2009.03.18 17:38:00 - [2] I like it.
Xialigan Gunship Diplomacy	Posted - 2009.03.18 18:09:00 - [3] cool idea, bring it !
Mistress Jeanette	Posted - 2009.03.18 18:29:00 - [4] yep good idea
Gideon Kross Caldari PROGENITOR CORPORATION	Posted - 2009.03.18 18:48:00 - [5] Very cool idea... It would also lengthen the short leash that wouldbe Bounty Hunters have had on them for years. Quote: I was contemplating the immortal words of Socrates; Who said '... I Drank What?!'
David Grogan Gallente The Motley Crew	Posted - 2009.03.18 18:53:00 - [6] signed SIG: if my message has spelling errors its cos i fail at typing properly :P
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.03.18 19:21:00 - [7] I might move the numbers out a bit further than -2 / +2 ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Sig Sour	Posted - 2009.03.19 01:20:00 - [8] Believe it or not, you can attack pirates without taking a security hit. They blink red on your overview. Orange is hardly a pirate. Orange will typically be the guy who isn't a role player and will pvp in low sec, and wont be scared to fire first. I do not like this idea, pirates have taken a lot of nerfs over the last year, lay off already.
Sig Sour	Posted - 2009.03.19 01:23:00 - [9] *Oh and to address your POV on how low sec pvp works - yeah it is silly, rarely is there a good fight. It would be neat to get some fleet pvp without bubbles. I like having implants in.
Camilo Cienfuegos Earned In Blood	Posted - 2009.03.19 01:36:00 - [10] Quote: Believe it or not, you can attack pirates without taking a security hit. They blink red on your overview. Orange is hardly a pirate. Orange will typically be the guy who isn't a role player and will pvp in low sec, and wont be scared to fire first. This. Pirates are -5 and below, and you can shoot them as much as you like without consequence (other than perhaps the pirate shooting back - even his FRIENDS will not get the right to shoot you, as they're considered an outlaw). The folks you see sitting between 0 and -5 are not pirates, they are simply people with a bad reputation and do not deserve being beaten up by anti pirates. - Originally by: The Cuckoo Good luck in defending idiotic and greedy noobs, as far as I'm concerned, you are their champion.
Valandril Caldari Ex-Mortis	Posted - 2009.03.19 01:40:00 - [11] You can shoot pirates w/o consequences (guys with -5), what you can't shoot are ppl who go to lowsec for occasional pvp. Please reaize sig to a maximum of 400 x 120 - Mitnal Please stop messing my sig - Val
Ruze Ahkor'Murkon Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2009.03.19 01:51:00 - [12] I've always been told that it's a bad pirate, or a lazy one, who lets himself get below -5. Something about 'don't let your enemy see you coming'. Good pirates have positive sec Originally by: 5pinDizzy Troll Score-o-Meter --------Failure----------\|\|\|-----------Succes------- 10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1--0--1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10
Teamosil Minmatar Good Time Family Band Solution	Posted - 2009.03.19 02:01:00 - [13] Originally by: Sig Sour *Oh and to address your POV on how low sec pvp works - yeah it is silly, rarely is there a good fight. It would be neat to get some fleet pvp without bubbles. I like having implants in. What would you suggest then? I think we're both looking for the same thing- good fights, not nerfing piracy. Yeah, if they're below -5.0 they go red, but then they're targetted by gate guns too, right? Most the pirates I've seen, at least in 0.3 and 0.4 systems, have stuck above that line. How about if they accompanied a change like this with increasing the amount of modules that survive the fight to be looted from the wreck or something like that? This would make piracy a bit less safe, but something like that would make it a bit more rewarding too, and it would also make anti-piracy financially viable. Or what would pirates need to make it worth sticking to it despite a bit more risk? I dunno. It just doesn't seem quite logical as it is now. Seems like mining is about the riskiest profession in low sec. Piracy seems to be about the least risky. Anti-piracy makes you into a pirate.. It's all backwards! lol. I like the idea of every profession having a predator that goes after them to keep them on their toes. Miners/Arch/Hackers go after materials, pirates go after them, anti-pirates go after pirates, pirate corps go after anti-pirates, anti-pirate corps go after pirate corps, and so on all the way up to the biggest alliances. I think that should be the goal- nobody is ever safe. Seems to me like that cycle doesn't quite play out right in low sec because anti-piracy isn't viable, and I think a change similar to this one might help get that flowing.
Camilo Cienfuegos Earned In Blood	Posted - 2009.03.19 02:03:00 - [14] Quote: I've always been told that it's a bad pirate, or a lazy one, who lets himself get below -5. Or the pirates who consistently raise their sec status simply fail to make money through piracy and are forced to rat and run missions to earn their keep? - Originally by: The Cuckoo Good luck in defending idiotic and greedy noobs, as far as I'm concerned, you are their champion.
Zibu 81 ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.19 02:14:00 - [15] Right now there are mostly 2 types of "pirates" in low sec: "hardcore" ones wit sec status below -5 which you can shoot anyway and "weekend" ones that try to keep their sec status above -2 so they can go shopping any time they want. Your change would do pretty much nothing at all to populate low sec, as it would allow people with high sec (who are either 0.0 people and don't care about low sec or high sec carebears who don't fight) attack some of weekend pirates that went too low with their sec status. One thing that could help low sec would be to invert the way that gate guns work. No I don't want them to help gate campers, but rather make them really hurt big ships, but hardly scratch frigates and cruisers (so for example change them to gate missiles with high damage but also high explosion radius). This would actually allow new players to go and have a bit of pvp in cheap ships, while sustaining themselves on low sec rats (which would net you about the same rewards as lvl 1 to lvl 3 missions). This would also allow for a bit more of solo pvp as it's kind of suicidal to move around in a solo BS. Once you would be able to do fly a BS, you would be ready to move to 0.0 or switch to complexes or lvl 4 missions as a way of making money. Oh and as for: Quote: It seems to me like low sec pvp is generally pretty lame. Mostly it is about pirates in throw-away ships ganging up on ships that aren't designed for combat. You'd be surprised - the ships fighting in low sec are most of the time much more expensive than any other (apart maybe from mission running ships and supercapitals).
Camilo Cienfuegos Earned In Blood	Posted - 2009.03.19 02:16:00 - [16] I keep hearing that anti piracy isn't viable, and sure enough the evidence is there: Anti pirate corps have historically been awful, with only one or two exceptions to prove the rule and their presence is barely felt in Eve. The thing is, contrary to popular belief pirates don't make a living from killing and ransoming haulers and miners (the money is dreadful): we do that when we're bored and no other targets are available. We make our money either picking fights, holding the field and looting up or scanning down juicy mission runners and ransoming/popping them. Why can't anti-pirates make money the same way? Why isn't anti-piracy viable? Obviously scanning down mission runners is right out, but I think the bottom line is that for anti-pirates, the whole PvP thing is a secondary thought: Whilst the pirate makes his income from other players, the anti-pirate most likely treats PvP gains as a windfall and sources their ISK from other places. The "fix" for anti-piracy is in my opinion the redevelopment of the bounty hunting system and perhaps a reworking of the whole highsec/lowsec/nosec mechanic into a more fluid change in system security. - Originally by: The Cuckoo Good luck in defending idiotic and greedy noobs, as far as I'm concerned, you are their champion.
Teamosil Minmatar Good Time Family Band Solution	Posted - 2009.03.19 02:28:00 - [17] I like the idea of gate guns doing tons of damage to big ships, and not much to little ships. I agree that would probably help things in low sec. But, I disagree that this change would reduce the population in low sec. A lot of younger corporations seem to struggle with the cliff between high sec operations and null sec. If you search the recruitment forums, you mostly find three kinds of corps- 0.0, high sec carebears, and ones that fail. :) They can't give up access to high sec very easily until they have at least an alliance permitting them use of null sec, but if they try to venture into low sec too much, they either get picked off by pirates or they end up getting stranded because their security status drops. Not being able to shoot first is a massive disadvantage. It means you can never pick who to fight. If you have 2 cruisers and a pirate in a frigate shows up, he'll just fly away and not come back until he has 5 friends. If that problem were removed, and people who still need access to high sec were just as free to defend their turf as the pirates, I think you might see a lot more lower level corps venturing into low sec. With more even footing, they could send in some folks to thin out the pirates a bit, then move in their carebears. That in turn would probably mean there would be more prey for pirates in low sec. Seems to me like it could actually build low sec populations up.
Teamosil Minmatar Good Time Family Band Solution	Posted - 2009.03.19 02:36:00 - [18] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos Why can't anti-pirates make money the same way? Why isn't anti-piracy viable? The problem I'm pondering isn't whether anti-pirates have ways to make money so much as that effectively killing pirates means you need to be allowed to shoot first, which means concorde will eventually consider you to be a pirate yourself. So, if you still need or want access to high sec, you can't really be much of an anti-pirate and you end up with what you guys are talking about- anti-pirates that just dabble with pvp. To create a sustainable profession out of anti-piracy would mean anti-piracy would need to have some appeal that piracy doesn't (access to high sec) to balance out the appeal piracy has over anti-piracy (freedom to attack carebears).
Zibu 81 ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.19 02:44:00 - [19] If you want to defend "your" space in low sec you have to accept that you will be a pirate. There is no other way, as there is no simple way of knowing who is a pirate until he opens fire, and by that time it doesn't matter anymore. Because where do you draw a line who's a pirate and who's not? Right now it's -5 sec status, and you want to move that to -2, when it will be -2 it will just make the life of people floating above -5 atm a bit harder, as they'll have to mission / rat more and kill less. As for your example, if that frig was -1.9? You're just trying to move a line a bit higher. To make your proposal work you'd have to turn low sec into 0.0, or rather 0.0 without sov, titans and bubbles, and with crap rats and ore (which I'm not saying is bad, but it's no longer low sec as we know it).
Teamosil Minmatar Good Time Family Band Solution	Posted - 2009.03.19 02:55:00 - [20] Edited by: Teamosil on 19/03/2009 03:00:15 Originally by: Zibu 81 there is no simple way of knowing who is a pirate until he opens fire ... As for your example, if that frig was -1.9? You're just trying to move a line a bit higher. Yeah, that's a good point. My goal is not just to force pirates to go rat more frequently to stay above -2 instead of -5. That would just make the game more annoying. My thinking was that it would introduce more of a tiered system though. If you want to play it really safe as a pirate, you have to keep above -2 and deal with the hassle of that. If you are tolerant to the risk of the occasional anti-pirate, but not ready for gate guns, you have to keep it above -5 and get to deal with a bit less ratting hassle. If you are full blown ready for whatever is thrown at you, you don't need to worry about your security status. I don't think a change like this would mean that a pirate would be crushed the second he drops below -2 though. Scanning down a pirate is way harder than scanning down a miner, for example. The miner needs to stay put for a very long time mining while the pirate scans. The pirate typically moves frequently, or at least he has the option to. And, piracy would still probably be more profitable than anti-piracy anyways, so it isn't like the game would suddenly be flooded with anti-pirates. I just think this would add a small amount more risk, challenge, and real fights to the life of the pirate, and open up some options for folks that like pvp, but still want access to high sec. On the topic of turf defending, I think that's part of where the disconnect comes in. A player or corp that wants to retain access to high sec can easily exist either in high or null sec, but they are at a huge disadvantage in low sec. That's where I think that cliff comes in. Any corp not based on piracy is currently forced to jump right from high sec to null sec.
AshtarDJ Filthy Scum Scum Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.19 09:04:00 - [21] Ok, I know I may sound a bit harsh, but my goal here is not to troll your post. I appreciate that you've made a decent post against pirates that didn't involve a whole bunch of angry rants, but I honestly thing that since you (as you stated before) are pretty new to the game, you haven't got the whole picture yet. Originally by: Teamosil Yeah, that's a good point. My goal is not just to force pirates to go rat more frequently to stay above -2 instead of -5. That would just make the game more annoying. We find ratting, running missions, mining and other so called "carebear stuff" boring, so we chose the pirate life exactly because we then don't need to do it. No one tries to force miners or mission runners to PvP once a day to be able to continue doing what they like, so don't try to force us to rat to continue to be a pirate. Originally by: Teamosil Maybe a better solution would be a sliding scale? You lose almost as much security standing as usual if you blow up a ship with -1 security standing, a smaller amount if they are -2, and so on until -5 where you don't lose any. That would allow pirates to control their level of attractiveness to anti-pirates, anti-pirates would still have to go ratting like pirates do, so that would be more fair, but it would still make anti-piracy more viable. CCP already did it a couple of patches ago. It's in the game. If a +5 kills a -2, he will get a very small sec hit, but if a -2 kills a +5 he will get a much much higher hit for doing that. Originally by: Teamosil Or, you could even take it further and make it so you gain security status blowing up somebody at -5. Then pirates wouldn't even need to go ratting to build their status back up, they could just take on rival pirates. Pirates are not rats. You already gain the loot and the right to smacktalk him for months in local. If you want to gain ss, ratting is the way to go. Originally by: Teamosil Either way, pirate hunting is not easy. Pirates don't need to sit around in one place like miners do for example. They're a lot harder to scan down. So, I don't think any change with security status mechanics will really hugely harm piracy as a profession. I don't want to be harsh, but chasing pirates (or anyone else for that matter) is not easy because you are trying to kill a person, someone that has a brain (at least most of them) and as much as he wants to kill you, he doesn't want to die by doing it. You just need to be smarter then him or use better tactics. Ratting is too easy, PvP is mostly mind games. Originally by: Teamosil On the topic of turf defending, I think that's part of where the disconnect comes in. A player or corp that wants to retain access to high sec can easily exist either in high or null sec, but they are at a huge disadvantage in low sec. That's where I think that cliff comes in. Any corp not based on piracy is currently forced to jump right from high sec to null sec. Well... this is something that can easily create a 100 pages discussion thread by itself. Everyone has his own opinion on this topic. I can only state my own: Highsec is easy to live in. Even tho it is not completely safe, it is a good home for new players and the ones that don't rly like to PvP fulltime. Lowsec and nullsec are very very much alike. Pirates and 0.0 alliances do almost exactly the same thing. They chose a home for themselves, fight the locals to gain it and shoot everyone that is not blue to them. The only difference is that when you do it in lowsec you lose SS (flashes red) by doing it and ppl call you a pirate. When a guy in 0.0 does this, he loses nothing and they call it "Real PvP". But it's the exact same thing. "Pirates shoot haulers" one may say.... So you trying to tell me that if a neutral hauler enters "enemy space" (neutral) in 0.0, that the locals will happily let him go thru??? Never. Most alliances in this game have the NBSI policy (Not Blue Shoot It). It doesn't matter if it is a titan or a badger.
AshtarDJ Filthy Scum Scum Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.19 09:13:00 - [22] Bottom line is: There are already tools in the game that helps anti-pirates to fight pirates. You have already mentioned the SS hits. Do you know how it is to "live your life" online flashing red all the time? I then suggest you try it. Your argument saying that pirates fly around in "throw away ships" killing small stuff isn't rly true, because any decent pirate needs to fly ships that can take some sentry fire. That cuts off pretty much all cheap ships in game (and some of the expensive too). I have seen many posts whining about sentries not doing enough damage. I can certainly say that those ppl have never had a fight under sentry fire. Not only they limit what ships you can use and what setups you need to fit. Pirates can never use drones in a fight because of it (that's a huge disadvantage in a fight). Having to tank your enemies + sentries ain't an easy task. About 70% of my corp's loss mails have sentry guns as top damage on the killmail. If you don't believe me? Go to a quiet lowsec system, shoot a station and try to have a 1v1 against a corp mate of yours outside that station. Tell me how it goes....
Teamosil Minmatar Good Time Family Band Solution	Posted - 2009.03.19 17:21:00 - [23] Edited by: Teamosil on 19/03/2009 17:24:41 Good points. I didn't realize they already tier sec status loses like that. Good to know. But, it still seems like something is missing or you would see more anti-pirates floating around. I'm definitely not trying to limit piracy. An anti-pirate with no pirates is like a miner without ore. :) Let me put it another way. How can I achieve these three goals: 1) Engaging in PvP in low sec against other combat ships without any major strategic disadvantages hanging over my head like not being able to attack first. 2) Retaining access to high sec. 3) Not having to spend most my time ratting. I think it is a fair trade to give up being able to attack carebears in exchange for not having to rat incessantly to keep my security status up.
Teamosil Minmatar Good Time Family Band Solution	Posted - 2009.03.19 18:22:00 - [24] Edited by: Teamosil on 19/03/2009 18:24:26 Originally by: AshtarDJ Do you know how it is to "live your life" online flashing red all the time? I then suggest you try it. I think this cuts to the point. In essense, a mining barge in low sec, although they aren't flashing red in the UI, draws at least as many attacks as a pirate who is flashing red. The only people in low sec that seem not to have to worry about getting attacked much are pirates who keep their status above -5. It doesn't seem fair to me that somebody who chooses the life of piracy can at the same time leverage the security status mechanics to discourage people from attacking them in turn. If somebody chooses to pvp, part of that should be accepting that you might get attacked yourself. You shouldn't be able to be a pirate and still allowed to hide behind concorde.
Daedalus II	Posted - 2009.03.19 18:58:00 - [25] Edited by: Daedalus II on 19/03/2009 18:59:47 A few ideas: Instead of having a set limit at +2 can shoot -2, have it floating such that +4 can shoot anyone up to -1, +3 can shoot anyone up to -2, +2 can shoot anyone up to -3, +1 can shoot anyone up to -4. With very high sec status you could shoot almost any pirate, but it would require work from your side to get that high sec status. I've heard about suggestions about corps or alliances being "given" low sec system to govern them for the NPC faction that owns it. In that case I assume they would have the right to shoot anyone in their area, and they would benifit from shooting pirates, as their system and stations would be considered safe and get more trading. A part of the trade taxes would be given them as payment from the NPC faction, and the more trading they get the more tax income comes their way. Another idea is to have CONCORD even in low sec, but they would be weaker. They would come to the aid of the attacked (eventually, takes longer in lowest sec systems), but only to even the odds, the victim would have to fight like a cornered beast, but COULD survive. This would make it useless to blob someone, because that would only attract more CONCORD to their aid. A resonably even 1v1 would not attract any CONCORD help.
Teamosil Minmatar Good Time Family Band Solution	Posted - 2009.03.19 20:59:00 - [26] Edited by: Teamosil on 19/03/2009 21:08:03 I like the idea of letting +4 attack -1 and +3 attack -2 and so on. That would avoid the problem with pirates feeling like they need to rat to stay above a particular line. The more you pirate, the more people can attack you. Good idea. Although, I'd probably recommend making it +5 can attack -1, +4 can attack -2, and so on. Give the fledgling pirates a little room to learn their trade before they have to deal with anti-pirates. But, I don't like the idea of concorde in low sec. I'd prefer a more organic situation where low sec is balanced out using players rather than npcs. For example, if you made anti-piracy more viable, then when a carebear gets attacked, they could call out for help in local. That would certainly draw more pirates, but if anti-piracy were not so disincentivized, some anti-pirates might come to try to rescue you as well. Right now, small low sec battles are one frig vs. one carebear and big battles are lots of frigs vs. one carebear... A change to security status mechanics might mean the possibility that what starts as an attempt to gank a barge would turn into a decent sized, two sided battle.
Alia Xi Caldari	Posted - 2009.03.20 01:40:00 - [27] Originally by: Teamosil So, my suggestion is to change the low sec security status mechanics to allow pilots with a security over 2.0 to attack pilots with security statuses below -2.0 without suffering a drop in their own security status. My thinking is that this would liven up low sec and result in more opportunities for decent pvp there. I endorse this product and/or service. Anything that brings more people in is only a good thing, not just for pirates but for anti-pies too. I'm sure lots of potential anti-pies are dubious about getting their sec status wrecked or bored with having to rat it back up again. Sounds like a good plan. Obviously the only drawback will be from the empire pirates who keep their sec status high enough to enter empire space. I doubt they'd like getting ganked in a 0.5 system - so expect some whining, but if you're gonna do the crime an all that.... At -5 or under a pirate/outlaw gets no protection from sentry guns, and you don't take a sec status hit for shooting us. Blog \| Larkonis Tassler 4 CSM
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.03.20 01:43:00 - [28] No. I'd rather see lowsec be worth something financially so that organized groups would go in to exploit it, and as such would fight back against pirates. Don't like the idea of lowsec being just a place where Ebil Piwates fight against Internets Knights in Shining Armor.
Alia Xi Caldari	Posted - 2009.03.20 01:56:00 - [29] Originally by: Kahega Amielden No. I'd rather see lowsec be worth something financially so that organized groups would go in to exploit it, and as such would fight back against pirates. Don't like the idea of lowsec being just a place where Ebil Piwates fight against Internets Knights in Shining Armor. That too would bring more people, and more targets to low sec - which is good. At the moment it's where pirates kill things for loot and anti-pies shoot -5's to try and pad killboards, and also loot the pirate wrecks in the name of... anti-piracy In seriousness it does have some financial benefit in the way of pos's for research, (moon?) mining, and some minerals you couldn't get in hi sec. It's not totally hopeless, but it could use some love. Blog \| Larkonis Tassler 4 CSM
Teamosil Minmatar Good Time Family Band Solution	Posted - 2009.03.20 02:45:00 - [30] Originally by: Alia Xi it has the _possibility_ to bring more potential targets to low sec Exactly. Thats more like it. Making low sec more profitable would help a lot too. Agreed. Personally, I vote they adjust the security status mechanics further to make anti-piracy more viable, set up t3 blueprints to make them rely heavily on 0.0 and low sec ores, maybe adjust capital ship blueprints as well, and improve the drops in low sec exploration sites. Make those changes and I think you'll find a low sec that is more fun and profitable for pirates, carebears, bounty hunters, and anti-pirates alike, and I think it will make life a whole lot more interesting for low end corps. I also think the idea Zibu had about making the gate guns do more damage to larger ships and less to smaller sounds appealing too, although that one I havne't thought all the way through.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.