EVE Search - New Dev Blog: Sovereignty--Breaking the Chains

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: Sovereignty--Breaking the Chains

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 11 post(s)
ArmyOfMe The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.09.10 06:24:00 - [301] Originally by: ElvenLord Originally by: ArmyOfMe Originally by: ElvenLord You know, in life one that makes a mistake is the one paying for them. And in this case we are talking of trillions of wasted ISK. sure, are your alliance willing to pay back all the isk you have gained from moons as well at the same time? If that char is still in ownership of the person that used to be a member of both hirr and 4S, should also be aware of the amount of ISK made from tributes "vast" number of valuable moons, aint it? still same old me. and as far as i know RAWR has plenty of moons outside tribute as well. and having owned a 0,0 region must have done something good for RAWR's income seeing your pretty impressive titan and dread fleet. so as ive said, it looks like its paid of being in 0,0 even if you had to buy and fuel pos's
Infinion Caldari Endless Destruction	Posted - 2009.09.10 06:36:00 - [302] Will the new sovereignty system affect NPC controlled systems in 0.0 like the Stain region?
Ben Derindar Dirty Deeds Corp.	Posted - 2009.09.10 07:26:00 - [303] I can't help but think that a lot of what's outlined in this blog would have been great for alliances such as ASCN who were all about building "an empire away from empire" in their day, as opposed to the forum-infiltrating, TS-hacking, hot-dropping, isk-selling, NAP-festing, account-sharing, phone-calling, meme-spouting, serious-business unwashed 0.0 masses of today. Better late than never, I suppose. It's hard to predict the result of these changes without more detail, to be fair. On one hand, the process of maintaining existing sov becomes a lot easier which may gimp the existing projection-of-force issue in 0.0 even further, though I guess it's hoped that having to claim every system in between the R64s and not just the R64s themselves will cancel that out to some degree. Time will tell. As far as what to charge for a sov tax is concerned, here's a formula for CCP to mull over: = number of systems currently claimed x the number of blobs they form on the map (to encourage an alliance to stick to one area of space) x the number of blue standings the alliance has (to discourage alt alliances) x the number of systems claimed by the blue list (to discourage NAPs between all the biggest powers) x the shortest distance in LY to each of the blues' sov claims (to keep the blue list to more relevant nearby parties only) Finally, don't forget to nerf capital-scale logistics while you're at it, please. /Ben
Kerfira	Posted - 2009.09.10 07:29:00 - [304] Originally by: The GrimWristler IGN stated that titans will be majorly nerfed in dominion also. why is this the case? many people complain over multiple titans simultaneously setting off DD's which prove to be invinsible. why cant a restriction of titans per alliance be introduced or having allowed only 1 titan for an alliance per system at any one time? And what would prevent anyone from creating a separate alliance for each titan pilot? You can not say 'Ok, then let's make a restriction that only 2 DD's can be set off in a system per hour' either, since people would then pre-DD a system before going there. Restrict the number of titans allowed in a system, same thing.... Number limits of any kind can and WILL be exploited! Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
Nicolo da'Vicenza Amarr Dissonance Corp Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.09.10 07:39:00 - [305] Amarr Victor
destinationunreachable Hello Kitty Fanclub	Posted - 2009.09.10 10:00:00 - [306] I had already posted this in the german forums. It seems CCP wants to move the income from moon gold to player generated (if I understand their comments here correctly) and at the same time charge per system. This is a List with all Alliances with the amount of systems and players (including obviously alts and inactive accounts) as well as a calculation of players per system. Seems there will be soon lots of free space in the east. c/d ?
Tobias Sjodin Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.09.10 10:27:00 - [307] Edited by: Tobias Sjodin on 10/09/2009 10:33:46 I hate how dev-blogs more and more are like rhetorical political statements. A lot of talk and no real information, as if it's created to give the blind and easily swayed a lot of 'hype' about nothing. And you leave out the most important statement of them all, the one that should've been FIRST on your agenda and that is TRANSITION from current sov-mechanics into the new ones. Since you're not doing that every alliance with Sov4, supercapital building, etc. are going to squirm and create forum drama, which you could've avoided by some smart planning and decent community-relations. Good job CCP. Please hire someone competent who can strategize about HOW TO TALK TO YOUR FANS and COMMUNITY. It's not that I believe it's a bad expansion, it's the opposite. But you really haven't improved on your communication skills since the old t20 incident. Just saying.
Sworn Absent GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.09.10 10:48:00 - [308] Originally by: Teck7 Edited by: Teck7 on 09/09/2009 22:11:31 So the real short of it is, sov mechanics on a very simplified level, will go back 3 years where an enemy can relatively risk free conquer space with absolutely nothing forcing them to field capitals. The one nice thing about the current mechanics is that the attackers must risk as much as the defenders stand to lose; i.e: if the defenders can field 100 capitals and 200 support, then the enemy must typically be able to match that. The new mechanics will overwhelmingly favor conventional, non-capital, blob fests; so that there is no equalizing factor, that the guy with the most numbers will simply win now. This post right here is ATLAS in a nutshell

CCP Whisper	Posted - 2009.09.10 10:50:00 - [309] Originally by: Tobias Sjodin And you leave out the most important statement of them all, the one that should've been FIRST on your agenda and that is TRANSITION from current sov-mechanics into the new ones. The issue of the transition from the old mechanics to the new ones is something that is at the top of the list of priorities. This extends not just to making sure we account for all the current structures and processes, but that we test this to within an inch of its life several times over to make sure the deployment goes well. The process of moving from one to another is scary in its complexity and we are looking at several options to carry this out. Work on this is not completed. We've created a new internal testing infrastructure specially for the sovereignty changes and are working through the various options open to us. Until we know exactly how it is going to work (and that it works) you should not expect exact details. In the full knowledge that any statements regarding the transition made at this point will be treated as final, gospel truth I am not going to commit my team and the deployment team to a course of action which may yet turn out to be unworkable.

Tobias Sjodin Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:02:00 - [310] Originally by: CCP Whisper I am not going to commit my team and the deployment team to a course of action which may yet turn out to be unworkable. Well, you fully well know what happens when you release incomplete information to the community such as this dev-blog. Do you guys really enjoy watching people get ***ed at you for things that possibly won't even be implemented in the game (compare this to the carrier nerf). This change is on such a grand scale, I'm sure you realize this, because sovereignty is something your dedicated players commit to 24/7 for years. If you thought people would be ***ed at just talking about a carrier nerf, guess what is going to happen when the dev-blog to many essentially may seem like a 'Sov-nerf'. Personally I think you could've avoided the need to respond to queries by deciding transition first, and then talking about how said transition would have been made. The breakfasts, dinners, late-night snacks stuck in sov-holding alliance leader throats because of this may have resulted in the first series of mass-metagame homicide. ;)
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:07:00 - [311] Originally by: Tobias Sjodin And you leave out the most important statement of them all, the one that should've been FIRST on your agenda and that is TRANSITION from current sov-mechanics into the new ones ... But you really haven't improved on your communication skills since the old t20 incident. Just saying. It is always interesting to see how strong people feel about Eve. But the quote shows a real lack of an understanding how planning and top level strategy works, should work and how damn well CCP is doing here. On essential long term strategies it should NEVER be the first consideration 'what can we do from here on?' but instead ALWAYS the question 'where do we want to go?' If the question of the goal is clarified THEN and only then the question of how to reach that goal from the current position can be tackled and answered. First you need a goal to have a clear direction. Otherwise it is just stumbling around blindly. This order of steps is the right one - everywhere. Here in Eve at this case but also in real life. Take it as a free lesson But yeah, I am more curious than ever for the next blogs!
Shidhe Minmatar The Babylon5 Consortuim	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:17:00 - [312] Sounds promising - I may even get interested in 0.0 again.
jk scowling Sane Industries Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:20:00 - [313] Originally by: Tobias Sjodin Originally by: CCP Whisper I am not going to commit my team and the deployment team to a course of action which may yet turn out to be unworkable. Well, you fully well know what happens when you release incomplete information to the community such as this dev-blog. Do you guys really enjoy watching people get ***ed at you for things that possibly won't even be implemented in the game (compare this to the carrier nerf). This change is on such a grand scale, I'm sure you realize this, because sovereignty is something your dedicated players commit to 24/7 for years. If you thought people would be ***ed at just talking about a carrier nerf, guess what is going to happen when the dev-blog to many essentially may seem like a 'Sov-nerf'. Personally I think you could've avoided the need to respond to queries by deciding transition first, and then talking about how said transition would have been made. The breakfasts, dinners, late-night snacks stuck in sov-holding alliance leader throats because of this may have resulted in the first series of mass-metagame homicide. ;) I actually appreciate that they are letting us know what they are planning, and maybe then even getting some feedback from the playerbase. But yeah this is EVE, rage away.
Tobias Sjodin Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:25:00 - [314] Originally by: jk scowling I actually appreciate that they are letting us know what they are planning, and maybe then even getting some feedback from the playerbase. But yeah this is EVE, rage away. That's just it, they haven't let us know what they're planning. We know nothing of the options they're considering for a transition. So your point is moot.
GPFS	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:27:00 - [315] @Gnuple WHAT TITANS?!? With the incoming titan nerf, we might as well put strip miners and start mining veldspar...Putting a titan on field must be very well calculated risk, because there is the risk of one getting takled, and when you have titan cought somewhere trust me, all hell brakes loose and you migt loose it pretty fast... @Autobot So we should all cancel our subscriptions? Interesting point of view, wonder what the shareholders think about that? This is not very productive way of doing things. While POS bashing is really boring thing, removing everything in such a radical way might as well kill the entire game. Just hope CCP makes full backup of the DB and SOL servers the day before the deployment, you might never know when you will need it . So far as I read this thread most of the people that are about this idea are those who live in high/low sec or don't have a nice 0.0 sec spot, and they whine about it. Guess mining veldspar is getting boring after some time...
Tobias Sjodin Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:30:00 - [316] Originally by: Gnulpie But the quote shows a real lack of an understanding how planning and top level strategy works, should work and how damn well CCP is doing here. On essential long term strategies it should NEVER be the first consideration 'what can we do from here on?' but instead ALWAYS the question 'where do we want to go?' I see you haven't been following CCP development blogs previously. So here: CCP usually posts a blog when they have decided on what to do, and when the work is in the finishing stages. They then inform us of what they have made in a series of blogs. And we get to nerdrage about it. If you think that the blog is some kind of 'possibility' then you need to work on your reading-skills. The point I was making was that they should've informed, particularly the alliances that this mod affect how the transition is being made PRIOR to any other information so they can make the necessary preparations. But go ahead and make more strawmen if you wish.
Atrienne	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:38:00 - [317] I hope they will rework moonmining system, this will make game viable for smaller alliances, because now smaller alliances just catching what fall from table after bigger guys dinner.
Ad Valorem	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:40:00 - [318] Ok,ok my Corp sets up our little home in Delve, just a few systems for some major carebear pursuits and I invest heavily in upgrading it all to get my own dyson vacuum cleaner, and dysprosium moon goo out the wazoo . I've invested in the mod to delay local and have dreadnought sized gate guns with ubertracking. Then some ebil piwates decide to attack coz they want my moongold can i slash and burn it all making my own system worthless to them, or will their victory gain them the spoils?
Mioelnir Minmatar Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:41:00 - [319] Originally by: CCP Whisper The issue of the transition from the old mechanics to the new ones is something that is at the top of the list of priorities. This extends not just to making sure we account for all the current structures and processes, but that we test this to within an inch of its life several times over to make sure the deployment goes well. The process of moving from one to another is scary in its complexity and we are looking at several options to carry this out. Work on this is not completed. We've created a new internal testing infrastructure specially for the sovereignty changes and are working through the various options open to us. Until we know exactly how it is going to work (and that it works) you should not expect exact details. In the full knowledge that any statements regarding the transition made at this point will be treated as final, gospel truth I am not going to commit my team and the deployment team to a course of action which may yet turn out to be unworkable. Well, I doubt anyone here is really interested in the SQL statements and diffs that will make this transition happen. The technical deployment quirks you are talking about. What people want to know are high level design decisions. - will current sov systems have a grace period in which the current sov will be hold to give the controlling entity time to prepare deployment of the new structures or decide to abandon that space? Or will it be free-for-all? - will systems with higher level sov inherit certain benefits with regars to structures rquiring higher level sov, i.e. will all cyno beacon networks, jump bridges and cynojammers go offline (if yes, how long to reenable them) or will there be a grace period? - will capital ship arrays stay at "sov 1" or will they require a higher system upgrade? Will currently running jobs get suspended until that upgrade is deployed, which sov levels will inherit this upgrade (if any)? How long does it take to be able to deploy that upgrade if it isn't inherited? - will there be a benefit similar to constellation sovereignity for entities that pumped massive amounts of ISK into (maybe not even necessary) outpost deployments? - has the economics team analyzed the expected effects of this massive reduction of control towers on the ice products market? Is this reduction on the amount of miners a 0.0 entity needs within its ranks (or working for them) a side-effect that can't be helped, or intended? These kinds of things should be set in stone in your design specs already, and those are the things that are really of interest.
Jack Gilligan THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:42:00 - [320] Originally by: CCP Whisper Originally by: Tobias Sjodin And you leave out the most important statement of them all, the one that should've been FIRST on your agenda and that is TRANSITION from current sov-mechanics into the new ones. The issue of the transition from the old mechanics to the new ones is something that is at the top of the list of priorities. This extends not just to making sure we account for all the current structures and processes, but that we test this to within an inch of its life several times over to make sure the deployment goes well. The process of moving from one to another is scary in its complexity and we are looking at several options to carry this out. Work on this is not completed. We've created a new internal testing infrastructure specially for the sovereignty changes and are working through the various options open to us. Until we know exactly how it is going to work (and that it works) you should not expect exact details. In the full knowledge that any statements regarding the transition made at this point will be treated as final, gospel truth I am not going to commit my team and the deployment team to a course of action which may yet turn out to be unworkable. That's all well and good, but it'd be nice if you guys realized that releasing incomplete generalities like this dev "blog" full of cataclysmic generalities with few (almost no) specifics is far FAR worse than detailing "this is our plan A at the moment, if it proves unworkable, we'll come back with plan B". You guys do realize that if you release the patch, and everyone loses ALL sov which turns all of 0.0 into a death scramble, your reputation is going to fall to the likes of SOE, right? If you spell out a plan, then have to change it later, anyone who flames you for that is being childish and immature. The flames you guys are getting for bomb throwing (today's blog) and then running away behind stone walls, however, was brought on by yourselves. My opinions are my own and do not necessarily represent those of my corp or alliance.
jk scowling Sane Industries Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:42:00 - [321] Originally by: Tobias Sjodin The point I was making was that they should've informed, particularly the alliances that this mod affect how the transition is being made PRIOR to any other information so they can make the necessary preparations. Ok so the Devblog should have been "This is how the transition to the new sov mechanic is going to be..." Without explaining any of the new sov mechanic, doesn't make sense, and wouldn't help you to prepare, so moot point really. I'm sure this will be covered in later devblogs when they know how it will work.
Jack Gilligan THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:47:00 - [322] Originally by: Gekkoh Originally by: Full Bowl Ha! Large alliance tears! control 1 system = 25mil per month/gate control 2 systems = 50mil per month/gate 3 = 100mil 4 = 150mil etc.etc.etc. better be using every system you have to make isk! How about: 1 system - 25M/month 2 systems - 50M/month 3 systems - 100M/month 4 systems - 200M/month 5 systems - 400M/month 6 systems - 800M/month 7 systems - 1.6B/month 8 systems - 3.2B/month ... We'd have lots of smaller organizations duking it out with their many neighbors. Blobs are less common, and fun fighting is more common. If they make it a scaling thing, where systems get more expensive the more a single alliance holds, all you are going to see are patchworks of this: Alliance Alliance1 Alliance2 Alliance3 and so forth. This won't open up any space for smaller alliances, the big alliances will just form dummy "holding" alliances to hang on to space at the cheapest possible cost.
Slave 2739FKZ Minmatar	Posted - 2009.09.10 11:55:00 - [323] Originally by: Praesus Lecti Originally by: Slave 2739FKZ Morsus Mihi has a special thing with whining, amiright? Please do not extrapolate from ElvenLord's inane blathering to encompass the entirety of Morsus Mihi. Believe me he does not speak for everyone. The rabid theorycrafting and predictions of doom and gloom based solely upon conjecture has produced some quite hilarious readings. I can't wait to the upcoming dev blogs on this subject. The AT whinage was pretty epic too. Also lol at Viper **ty, are you fearing you won't be able to hold bazillions of R64's anylonger or what? WIS is an expansion which allows EVE players to wear leather and walk around stations. Dust514 is a console shooter/rts** which will tie into EVE and affect sov.
zenox paradox	Posted - 2009.09.10 12:10:00 - [324] Originally by: GPFS Edited by: GPFS on 09/09/2009 16:29:41 Edited by: GPFS on 09/09/2009 16:29:25 So you keep nerfing everything in game...to make it more easy for the noobs ( the titan nerf that's comming, "mommy...mommy I got DD and lost me fancy ship" ). Big alliances spend tons of work and time to get a hold on the space they have (set up POS towers defend them), and now you decide to stick a middle finger in their *. I wonder how much more abuse can your players ( customers ) take . Way to go, that's the proper way to treat your customers...People never learn that big and radical changes don't do so well with the ppl. Don't you realise, 90% of the players are Empire based, not 0.0 based. By opening up 0.0 to smaller groups of noob(ish) players 90% of CCP's customers are likely to extend their subscriptions because there actually might be a point, rather than losing 10% of their customer base. Do you realise that if they wiped out every Goon account out there their subscriptions would increase rapidly as more space is opened up to the masses! Trouble with you 0.0 guys is that you forget what it's like in Empire - what do we have to look forward to if you control all of nullsec and always will? We'll keep buying your ** to line your pockets while we munch on Veld roids! Try doing a 14 day trial completely seperately and ask yourself "what's the point"
Bado Sten Minmatar Dead poets society The Laughing Men	Posted - 2009.09.10 12:24:00 - [325] Originally by: zenox paradox Originally by: GPFS Edited by: GPFS on 09/09/2009 16:29:41 Edited by: GPFS on 09/09/2009 16:29:25 So you keep nerfing everything in game...to make it more easy for the noobs ( the titan nerf that's comming, "mommy...mommy I got DD and lost me fancy ship" ). Big alliances spend tons of work and time to get a hold on the space they have (set up POS towers defend them), and now you decide to stick a middle finger in their *. I wonder how much more abuse can your players ( customers ) take . Way to go, that's the proper way to treat your customers...People never learn that big and radical changes don't do so well with the ppl. Don't you realise, 90% of the players are Empire based, not 0.0 based. By opening up 0.0 to smaller groups of noob(ish) players 90% of CCP's customers are likely to extend their subscriptions because there actually might be a point, rather than losing 10% of their customer base. Do you realise that if they wiped out every Goon account out there their subscriptions would increase rapidly as more space is opened up to the masses! Trouble with you 0.0 guys is that you forget what it's like in Empire - what do we have to look forward to if you control all of nullsec and always will? We'll keep buying your ** to line your pockets while we munch on Veld roids! Try doing a 14 day trial completely seperately and ask yourself "what's the point" QFT!
Snake O'Donell Gallente Dark-Rising	Posted - 2009.09.10 12:33:00 - [326] Originally by: zenox paradox Originally by: GPFS Edited by: GPFS on 09/09/2009 16:29:41 Edited by: GPFS on 09/09/2009 16:29:25 So you keep nerfing everything in game...to make it more easy for the noobs ( the titan nerf that's comming, "mommy...mommy I got DD and lost me fancy ship" ). Big alliances spend tons of work and time to get a hold on the space they have (set up POS towers defend them), and now you decide to stick a middle finger in their *. I wonder how much more abuse can your players ( customers ) take . Way to go, that's the proper way to treat your customers...People never learn that big and radical changes don't do so well with the ppl. Don't you realise, 90% of the players are Empire based, not 0.0 based. By opening up 0.0 to smaller groups of noob(ish) players 90% of CCP's customers are likely to extend their subscriptions because there actually might be a point, rather than losing 10% of their customer base. Do you realise that if they wiped out every Goon account out there their subscriptions would increase rapidly as more space is opened up to the masses! Trouble with you 0.0 guys is that you forget what it's like in Empire - what do we have to look forward to if you control all of nullsec and always will? We'll keep buying your to line your pockets while we munch on Veld roids! Try doing a 14 day trial completely seperately and ask yourself "what's the point" I know its hard to believe, but YOU** could live in 0.0 if you really wanted to. Therefore your point is moot.
zenox paradox	Posted - 2009.09.10 12:44:00 - [327] Originally by: Snake O'Donell I know its hard to believe, but YOU could live in 0.0 if you really wanted to. Therefore your point is moot. Snake, I've lived in 0.0 for some time (this is posted on another toon on my account, not an alt) but the whole 0.0 thing isn't what is was set up to be. In an earlier post somewhere someone had it spot on, it was about corps creating their own empire outside Empire. It's just been taken to the nth degree now as very few corps/alliances can compete. I'm not whining, I know you guys work hard to keep your soverignity (I've been there, I've literally got a wardrobe of T-shirts) but ask yourself if it's fun anymore? It's gone downhill in my view, especially since the moon mining and R64 stuff. It's started to become more enjoyable with WH and stuff but waiting in a gang of about 200 for another gang of 200 to come through your gate and have a gankfest? Come on, you might as well go and play Command & Conquer!!! I think CCP have missed the point here. It shouldn't be about making 0.0 more accessible, it should be about making it less valuable. Throw the odd Ark roid into a 0.9 system, have an mission outpost drop a T2 BP copy randomly.
Van Doren	Posted - 2009.09.10 12:50:00 - [328] Originally by: Professor Dumbledore You are going to **** this implementation up so badly it will be amazing. I stopped reading here cause I was laughing too hard. Thread winner!
GPFS	Posted - 2009.09.10 13:05:00 - [329] If you want to help noobs go in to 0.0, you can boost empire or low sec. Don't just nerf things because ppl got good at using them, and thus the new accounts will get a chance. Make the learning bonus 5mil SP instead of 1.6 so they can fly a decent ship and start doing PvP faster so it's more interesting to them ( if that is what they want ). I do agree that current state of the POSes is a nightmare, but trust me so is the issue of fueling them and all the logistics you have to do. As I said if you want to help the noobs boost them, but not at the expense of someones hard work!! And than telling them they ain't getting any compensation for all the effort they put in to it, cuz next time it will be YOU that will get cut off. Than I wonder what will you think about it..?
Misinomer	Posted - 2009.09.10 13:22:00 - [330] Key strategic questions for the end result of this patch: - 1. Will the change allow any corporation/alliance not blued to one of the 5 main 0.0 entities to hold/use 0.0 space? No 2. Will the changes encourage 0.0 Alliances to stop being so paranoid and actually recruit corps (that do not have a 100% pvp character roster) No 3. Will Empire and Low sec still be as tedious as it is now? Yes 4. Will the patch encourage 0.0 war? Will it push the 5 power blocs in 0.0 into attacking each other? No 5. What will the patch achieve? a. Ps off/please 0.0 alliances b. Ps off industrialists/miners c. Status Quo (3 months after the patch is implemented) I like the idea of Sov being changed, but if your not in 0.0, or cant get into 0.0 - it makes not a blind bit of difference. Misi

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: 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.