EVE Search - Projectiles

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Projectiles

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Roemy Schneider BINFORD	Posted - 2009.05.07 04:41:00 - [31] Originally by: jaws104 Think this kind of highlights the problem --Maelzors with BS V 25% rof bonus arty is still outdamaged by megabeams on a maelstrom. Cue 'but look at your cap' brigade irrefutable fact is irrefutable - putting the gist back into logistics
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.05.07 04:58:00 - [32] If you want a projectile boost, you'd better be willing to give up your speed advantage. Projectiles must be the worst type of weapon, or you will end up with ships with equally effective guns but the speed to always fight at their preferred range. In other words, there will no longer be any reason to fly anything other than Minmatar. -----------
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2009.05.07 05:05:00 - [33] Originally by: Merin Ryskin If you want a projectile boost, you'd better be willing to give up your speed advantage. Projectiles must be the worst type of weapon, or you will end up with ships with equally effective guns but the speed to always fight at their preferred range. In other words, there will no longer be any reason to fly anything other than Minmatar. You're wrong. There's a big difference between 'balanced weapons and ships' and 'complete **'. Right now, they're complete . Balancing them doesn't mean that you have to over the rest of the race. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum *** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.05.07 05:23:00 - [34] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Merin Ryskin If you want a projectile boost, you'd better be willing to give up your speed advantage. Projectiles must be the worst type of weapon, or you will end up with ships with equally effective guns but the speed to always fight at their preferred range. In other words, there will no longer be any reason to fly anything other than Minmatar. You're wrong. There's a big difference between 'balanced weapons and ships' and 'complete **'. Right now, they're complete . Balancing them doesn't mean that you have to ** over the rest of the race. -Liang Only battleship projectiles are a problem, and only because the Minmatar "speed advantage" is much less effective at the battleship level. The rest are just fine, if you boost them at all you're going to have to nerf something to compensate. -----------
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2009.05.07 05:36:00 - [35] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 07/05/2009 05:39:36 Originally by: Merin Ryskin Only battleship projectiles are a problem, and only because the Minmatar "speed advantage" is much less effective at the battleship level. The rest are just fine, if you boost them at all you're going to have to nerf something to compensate. Yeah, that totally explains why the Zealot > Muninn. I might agree that small/med projectiles are passable, but small/med artillery is still pretty bad. -Liang Ed: Also, the idea bandied about here (integrating ROF into the weapons themselves) wouldn't really break the weapons. They'd be just slightly better than they are now, but it's not like they'd suddenly displace lasers as mid range DPS (they do operate in falloff) nor would they displace blasters as close range DPS (not enough actual DPS). Also, Med Artillery and Large Arty/Autos are where 90% of the complaints originate. -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.05.07 05:53:00 - [36] Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 07/05/2009 05:55:08 Originally by: Liang Nuren Yeah, that totally explains why the Zealot > Muninn. I might agree that small/med projectiles are passable, but small/med artillery is still pretty bad. The Muninn sucks because the Muninn is a confused mess of a ship with the slot layout of an armor tanker, the resists of a shield tanker, a sniper bonus without the mids to fit a proper sniper setup, drones/missiles that are only useful up close, and a marginally useful tracking bonus. It's hopelessly outclassed by the Vagabond as a fast AC boat, dominated by the Hurricane in a close-range slugging match, and hopelessly outclassed by the Eagle in the fleet sniper role (which is a very narrow role, rails and beams suffer the same problem of a marginal role). Even if CCP completely removed the Zealot from the game nobody would fly the Muninn. Quote: Ed: Also, the idea bandied about here (integrating ROF into the weapons themselves) wouldn't really break the weapons. They'd be just slightly better than they are now, but it's not like they'd suddenly displace lasers as mid range DPS (they do operate in falloff) nor would they displace blasters as close range DPS (not enough actual DPS). Yes it would. It would be just as broken as integrating the Amarr cap bonus into the weapons themselves, giving the Vagabond/Hurricane/Sleipnir/Jaguar another 50% falloff would be a HUGE boost. Even if you feel it's a necessary boost, don't pretend this is some minor little tweak to slip into the patch notes with no warning or testing. Quote: Also, Med Artillery and Large Arty/Autos are where 90% of the complaints originate. Note that if you boost artillery you also have to boost rails, and to a lesser degree, beams. None of them are very useful. -----------
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.07 06:35:00 - [37] Now this is why Merin and Liang are wrong and should be banned from balancing topics, saying that the muninn is a bad sniper ,are you playing the same game? Because in 0.0 you see muninns everywhere, they are nearly as favoured ship as the zealot most sniper hacs are zealots and muninns, and most sniper bcs are hurricanes. Medium arties are awesome you have no clue at all what you are talking about. Yes muninn could be better with some changes but it is nowhere near useless , actually it is much more usefull than the eagle or deimos.
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.05.07 06:44:00 - [38] Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 07/05/2009 06:45:18 Originally by: Naomi Knight Now this is why Merin and Liang are wrong and should be banned from balancing topics, saying that the muninn is a bad sniper ,are you playing the same game? Because in 0.0 you see muninns everywhere, they are nearly as favoured ship as the zealot most sniper hacs are zealots and muninns, and most sniper bcs are hurricanes. Medium arties are awesome you have no clue at all what you are talking about. Yes muninn could be better with some changes but it is nowhere near useless , actually it is much more usefull than the eagle or deimos. 0.0 sniper blobs are hardly all of EVE PvP. Even if the Muninn is a good fleet sniper, that still doesn't mean it's a good ship or that artillery/rails/beams don't have issues. In fact I clearly stated that once already, that the major problem with them is how narrow their role is. Not that the Muninn is good, of course. It might be used in its narrow role (a fact which probably has more to do with Rapier/Vagabond pilots not wanting to train Caldari Cruiser V just for a small boost to a very narrow role than any amazing performance from the Muninn), but it's still terribly designed for that role. The tracking bonus is underwhelming, and the slot layout is *terrible* (lol, 3 mids on a sniper?). If the Muninn is a pure sniper HAC (and it must be, since it fails utterly in every *other* role), it should be properly focused on that role, just like the Eagle. By the numbers, the Zealot and Eagle simply outclass the Muninn even in the sniper role. Like it or not, that's just the way it is. -----------
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.07 07:09:00 - [39] Where does it say that the muninn was designted as a pure sniper hac?It wasnt thats why it is much more versalite than the eagle, which makes it a better choice in most cases. Anyway sniper hacs only should be used in medium-large fleets and it is there where the muninn is realy good with its huge alpha+ fast locking. Matar pilots don't train caldari cruisers, because matar ships are much better than caldari ones for pvp. Vaga>> cerb anytime for small gang Muninn>> eagle any time for fleets. Rapier >> falcon for solo. Broadsword = onyx more or less. Anyway why eagle considered a good sniper hac? With spike its dmg is less than acceptable. And at close range the other hacs are much better. Or you try to make the a comedy ceptor hunter with Lead ammo... even there the muninn is better at killing ceptors.
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2009.05.07 07:14:00 - [40] Originally by: Naomi Knight Where does it say that the muninn was designted as a pure sniper hac?It wasnt thats why it is much more versalite than the eagle, which makes it a better choice in most cases. Because it's utter trash at everything *but* sniping? Quote: Anyway why eagle considered a good sniper hac? With spike its dmg is less than acceptable. And at close range the other hacs are much better. Or you try to make the a comedy ceptor hunter with Lead ammo... even there the muninn is better at killing ceptors. Max range, dps at range, ability to use faction ammo instead of T2. -----------
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.07 08:07:00 - [41] Max range okay ,but only useable if you are with bs fleet. Fraction ammo , use republic carbonized lead with the muninn + drones it will be much better anti ceptor with better tracking and nearly twice the alpha dmg.
eliminator2 Gallente Annihilate. Shock Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.07 08:53:00 - [42] Originally by: Naomi Knight Blaster does less dmg at ac's optimal+falloff :P No cap use is significant especially when hybrid/laser bs can cap out themselves within minutes just by firing their guns.Where you dont run out are the fights which lasts less than 3 minutes where alpha>> dps. And even in cruiser size no cap use let you use your mwd much more frequently or longer period , which is good. Tachion is overpowered pls dont compare arties to that , compare it to the 425mm rail or mega beam. Most fc-s try to set up warp ins for tempest/mega optimals , so it doesnt matter much if it has lower optimal than the apoc/rokh. And with better speed and more cap for mwd you can escape from bubbles much easier and faster. I wish my rails would have as much alpha as the arties. If ccp decides to boost arties they have to boost rails/ missiles aswell. 1. blasters do way more dps than arty fallof or not (i fly both) 2.train ur electronic skill and engeenering up mmmkay? or fit a heavy/med cap injector i can use the amarr and gal ships and never get capped out un less someone nuets me with 3 heavy nuets :p 3.reason amarr get capped out so fast and have cap penalty is the fact they can change ammou in a few secs there ammou never runs out unless its faction/ i think t2 but it still takes ages and ages before they run out 4. my rails actually do more dps than my arties, and my caldari alt does hell alot of dps with missiles even same/abit more than a mega
Veryez	Posted - 2009.05.07 11:07:00 - [43] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Yes it would. It would be just as broken as integrating the Amarr cap bonus into the weapons themselves, giving the Vagabond/Hurricane/Sleipnir/Jaguar another 50% falloff would be a HUGE boost. Even if you feel it's a necessary boost, don't pretend this is some minor little tweak to slip into the patch notes with no warning or testing. While I could see how you could read this into what I said, let me be very clear I am NOT suggesting that the vaga/sleip/jag get a double falloff bonus. The Hurricane doesn't have a falloff bonus so I don't know how that got added, and per my suggestion it's second bonus would be tracking. I did say my second suggestion was "in general", if losing the ROF bonus on the vaga by incorporating it into guns, I would have no objection to the vaga simply losing the bonus with no other bonus gained, or as per CCP give it some useless bonus (like a target painter). If they simply had to have 4 bonuses, then reduce it's shields by 25% and give it a 5% shield bonus per level so it's a wash. The vaga is fine as it is. Each ship would have to be analyzed individually, with t2 ships easily being the toughest to balance. The Jag (and wolf) should really have a tracking bonus (like the rifter). The Muninn needs work, but an 5% increase in sensor range per level would be welcome. Obviously, I don't want to go into detail on this since this thread was primarily about large projectiles. Minmatar battleships are hurt primarily by the weakness in large projectiles, fixing large projectiles would go a long way in correcting both issues. That's why I posted specific changes to the battleships and large projectiles.
Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Aeternus.	Posted - 2009.05.07 12:44:00 - [44] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: RedSplat Originally by: Naomi Knight Projectile weapons are fine , why should ccp look into these? Rather a lot of people disagree And they are all wrong. If something needs to be changed are the op lasers. Whats wrong with projectile weapons anyway? when the best alpha ship in the game is amarr something is wrong.... And it's not lazers or amarr or ship bonuses that are the problem here, seeing as how I can't remember the last time I saw a ship get alpha'd by a minmatar in pvp I'd say something is wrong there. ccp fix mining agent missions % pls
Fish Mittens Minmatar 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.05.07 21:23:00 - [45] Edited by: Fish Mittens on 07/05/2009 21:26:58 I love the lazor Maelstrom example, this shows so clearly how broken Artillery is. Why not apply the proposed changes to Capital Projectiles to all Artillery? Decrease ROF, Increase Damage IMO I could accept artillery having the worst range and poor DPS, if they just had 1 useful unique attribute, Alpha Strike. This was how it was before the HP buff to all ships in eve. Then all that would need to be tweaked would be an increase in clip sizes for 1400's and 750's and also a tweak to the grid usage so that a Tempest could actually fit 6x1400s and an MWD without needing an RCU or a PDS.
Veryez	Posted - 2009.05.07 21:46:00 - [46] Originally by: Fish Mittens Edited by: Fish Mittens on 07/05/2009 21:26:58 I love the lazor Maelstrom example, this shows so clearly how broken Artillery is. Why not apply the proposed changes to Capital Projectiles to all Artillery? Decrease ROF, Increase Damage IMO I could accept artillery having the worst range and poor DPS, if they just had 1 useful unique attribute, Alpha Strike. This was how it was before the HP buff to all ships in eve. Then all that would need to be tweaked would be an increase in clip sizes for 1400's and 750's and also a tweak to the grid usage so that a Tempest could actually fit 6x1400s and an MWD without needing an RCU or a PDS. While most minmatar players would love to have our pre-revelations alpha back, it will never happen. CCP specifically stated they were raising the HP of ships and hardners/extenders to prolong battles. repeatedly we told them this was a pretty substantial nerf to minmatar ships, and their answer remained, "We know." CCP doesn't want alpha to matter, they want longer battles where DPS and EHP mean all, artillery and minmatar BS will consistently suffer because we can't get high DPS or EHP with our setups. While I would love to have a huge alpha, I have given up any hope of that occuring, and will settle for better range and DPS.
Fish Mittens Minmatar 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.05.07 21:58:00 - [47] Originally by: Veryez While most minmatar players would love to have our pre-revelations alpha back, it will never happen. CCP specifically stated they were raising the HP of ships and hardners/extenders to prolong battles. repeatedly we told them this was a pretty substantial nerf to minmatar ships, and their answer remained, "We know." CCP doesn't want alpha to matter, they want longer battles where DPS and EHP mean all, artillery and minmatar BS will consistently suffer because we can't get high DPS or EHP with our setups. While I would love to have a huge alpha, I have given up any hope of that occuring, and will settle for better range and DPS. Well I was suggesting an increase in alpha, and a decrease in ROF, giving the same low dps but higher volley damage. This would be different to what we had pre-revelations, but give Projectiles a unique attribute, not making them better than other races weapons, just different, with their own tactical uses. This is what having different races and weapon classes is about no? Also If CCP are prepared to make this change to Capital Projectiles, then why not consider it for all Artillery? Don't give up man! If CCP are prepared to change the nag then there is hope :D
Heimdal Galplen Minmatar Clown Punchers. Clown Punchers Syndicate	Posted - 2009.05.07 23:43:00 - [48] Why are so many people being baited by one troll? HURR DURR DURR PROTECTILES ARE FINE, NOW NOURISH ME WITH YOUR RESPONSES. You all need to spend some more time on the internets.
Turiel Demon Minmatar Shadow Reapers	Posted - 2009.05.08 00:58:00 - [49] Originally by: lecrotta Forgetting DDD proofing ect and just fitting for general med gang snipe ops. Range vs DPS comparison. The APOC with 3 x HS can lock and hit at 240-249km optimal for 401 turret dps (3707 volley DMG). The ROKH with 3 x MS can lock and hit at 249km optimal for 321 turret dps (1688 volley DMG). The MEGA with 3 x MS can lock and hit at 190-200km optimal for 351 turret dps (1847 volley DMG). The MAEL with 3 x GS can lock and hit at 152km optimal for 380 turret dps (2763 volley DMG). At the MEGAS 190-200km optimal the MAEL gets 167-199 turret DPS. At 210km the MEGA gets 278dps the MAEL gets 110dps. At 220km the MEGA gets 203dps the MAEL gets 72dps. At 230km the MEGA gets 125dps the MAEL gets 42dps. At 240km the MEGA gets 67dps the MAEL gets 23dps. At 249km the APOC gets 366dps the MEGA gets 32dps the MAEL gets 13dps. Obviously the ROKH gets to do its max turret dmg out to 249km. TRACKING Im using stats from standardly fitted ships using T2 long range ammo. TachII's (apoc) 0.00516. T2 RAILS (mega) 0.00490. T2 RAILS (rokh) 0.00301. T2 Arte (mael) 0.00281. PS: The figures i used have the rokh, mael and apoc using 8 guns. For those who are about to fly into the thread with a emoragerant about how difficult it is to fit a apoc with 8 guns: 1. Meh it can be done. 2. Even with 7 guns it gets the same turret DPS as the 7 gun MEGA but with better tracking AND much longer optimal. /thread Ok, not really, but that's a perfect summation about what's wrong with artillery, that's why large artillery in particular needs to be fixed. Lets now move on to just talk about HOW to fix, and keep this thread on top of a pile a bit longer than the 'concise whine' from a little while ago. Also, it has come to my attention that I'm really in need of a proper signature.
Gavin Darklighter THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2009.05.08 01:10:00 - [50] Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 08/05/2009 01:16:53 Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 08/05/2009 01:13:21 Originally by: lecrotta The MAEL with 3 x GS can lock and hit at 152km optimal for 380 turret dps (2763 volley DMG) You are not accounting for reload time in your DPS figures. The Maelstrom only does 345dps. Originally by: Veryez 1) All minmatar Battleships lose the ROF bonus. 2) The ROF Bonus gets rolled into large AC and Artillery base stats. All this would do is make large autocannons stronger on ships other than minmatar. Both the abaddon and the hyperion would be able to gain DPS, tracking, and rid themselves of cap usage by switching to autocannons. signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan
Fish Mittens Minmatar 0utbreak	Posted - 2009.05.08 01:12:00 - [51] Originally by: Heimdal Galplen Why are so many people being baited by one troll? HURR DURR DURR PROTECTILES ARE FINE, NOW NOURISH ME WITH YOUR RESPONSES. You all need to spend some more time on the internets. OP was an obvious troll yes, but that does not change the fact that Artillery is broken and need fixing badly. This has been broken for a long time, but with the proposed changes to Capital Projectiles, and the overwhelming response for change to Artillery being brought up in the "top 3" change request thread, many want this to be looked into and not ignored by the Devs. This Sums up the problem perfectly for me :D
Rahjadan Shardur Minmatar Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.05.08 01:53:00 - [52] Edited by: Rahjadan Shardur on 08/05/2009 01:54:27 Edited by: Rahjadan Shardur on 08/05/2009 01:53:55 Just because the numbers are biggest and so more obvious dosn't mean the small and medium Proj turrets are fine. You don't realy get the picture from only looking at the T2 ships, they usualy can compensate the shortcommings of certain mecanics with the 4 bonus they get. However if you look at the T1 Cruiser you'll see that nether Artys nor Autocannons work as they sould. The Stabber for instance only works right if you slap on one or two falloff rigs (Vagabond in the same role relies on it's falloff bonus). I don't think a T1 cruiser should have to be rigged to work correctly. The other example would be the rupture (yes i know many peole belive the ship works so it must be in ballance) it has one less turret slot than the counterpats of the other races and compensates with a second damage bonus, where it should have 5 turrets (or 4 better turrets than the current ones) and only one damage bonus leaving it with a second usefull bonus to comlement a sertain role. the reason the ship still works even with it's bonus out of balance is that it has the fitting options most ships should have: you don't need graet skills do fit a good fitting but with max skills you can get realy good fittings going. // off topic rant follows: [this brings me to a short off topic excourse about fitting skills: i hate them almost as much as i hate lerning skills because they are implemanted as a timesink not as something usefull optional. beeing a 3 year old player i have them all maxed out but thats the problem. maxed fitting skills don't let me fit realy good fittings, on the most ships they allow me to fit them at all, with some exeptions like the omen that can't be resonably fit even with max fitting skills or on the other side the rapture that allowes for all the fits i want even without max fitting skills allowing me to upgrade the weapons with AWU5] ------------------ In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. (Douglas Adams)
Gavin Darklighter THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2009.05.08 03:48:00 - [53] You can't seriously complain about the Minmatar T1 cruisers with a straight face can you? You think the Rupture is bad? Try fitting an Omen. signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2009.05.08 04:18:00 - [54] Originally by: Gavin Darklighter You can't seriously complain about the Minmatar T1 cruisers with a straight face can you? You think the Rupture is bad? Try fitting an Omen. I raise your Omen an Augoror. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Hexor V I.M.M	Posted - 2009.05.08 07:05:00 - [55] Boost the Rokh. Boost the Rokh. Boost the Rokh. Boost the Rokh. I want to be OP too. Trashcan snipers do need looking at though. ROF Decrease, Damage increase. Make them hit hard, but shoot slow as hell. That was the idea behind artillery initially wasn't it? ____ YHBT
Guru Saurfang Minmatar	Posted - 2009.05.08 08:53:00 - [56] the thing is... I wish to have known this before training for T2 big arty. Now is a long way till I get the lasers in line
Chellfire Minmatar Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.05.08 14:48:00 - [57] it's simple.... i want my high alpha, instapopping. king 'o' the hill, badass Pest back!! boost matari tracking and put the nerfbat away. Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Rahjadan Shardur Minmatar Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.05.08 15:46:00 - [58] Originally by: Gavin Darklighter You can't seriously complain about the Minmatar T1 cruisers with a straight face can you? You think the Rupture is bad? Try fitting an Omen. Originally by: Rahjadan Shardur // off topic rant follows: ... some exeptions like the omen that can't be resonably fit even with max fitting skills ... I did already mention the Omen, an i have to say i realy tryed to fly it but there is just no way to fit it even with max fitting skills. ------------------ In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. (Douglas Adams)
D3stroyer	Posted - 2009.05.08 17:22:00 - [59] To fix, a simple solution: AC's Swap the optimal & falloff stats for the weapons along with the Ship bonuses (Falloff bonus becomes optimal bonus) This now means AC's are getting their FULL 'paper' DPS instead of the horrendous falloff DPS! And as we're still fighting with inferior tanks compared to other races we're getting a better overall DPS, & still relying more on speed to keep us out of harms way Arties Reduce the ROF Increase Alpha by 50% Double the Clip size Increase optimal by 25% This give the Arties their Alpha back (at range), greater reduction in stupid reloads during lagtastic fleet fights & moves their snipe range to that of other ships. Why the hell this race has some of the worst fighting distances on it weapons when its defensive capabilities are sub standard to the other 3 races is beyond me! It should be: greater defense = closer range weapons / weaker defense = longer range weapons!! Ship bonuses still need to play the most important part of any boost/balance or we'll end up with every bugger slapping Projectiles onto their ships (regardless of the race!).
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.08 17:29:00 - [60] Originally by: D3stroyer Swap the optimal & falloff stats for the weapons along with the Ship bonuses (Falloff bonus becomes optimal bonus) That's called "lasers". I don't really wanna play the game with everything exactly the same. :-/ -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: 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.