EVE Search - [Proposal] Railgun Rebalancing

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Proposal] Railgun Rebalancing

» 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 30 .. 32 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Spugg Galdon	Posted - 2010.02.09 17:39:00 - [151] Edited by: Spugg Galdon on 09/02/2010 17:40:47 Originally by: Bagehi You are missing two major components to fleet warfare that make it significantly different than solo or small gang warfare. 1. Because a local tank is meaningless in a fleet fight, all ships have to stay in range of RR. Usually this means 8km (RR BS) unless your fleet is blessed with an abundance of logistics pilots who have taken the monk-like vow and forsaken the way of the killboard for the path of near-thankless selflessness. Which is to say sniper BS fleets stay in a tight ball 99% of the time. Slightly different than a sniper HAC fleet, which requires logistics. But, even then, an Eagle is never really going to be pushing range much, simply because even a logi has a max rep range that you have to stay within. 2. Fleet warp. A longer ranged platform will constantly have to burn further out to get to your optimal range. Of course, the fastest ships have the shortest ranged guns. However, there are more of them (because they do more damage) so fleets are dictated by the range that is best for most people, and that means 180km. And if beams and rails have their ranges nerfed they are forced to fit more range mods which sacrifice damage mods to get to this magical figure of 180km and then DPS will start to look the same would it not? Also if you want your longer ranged weapons to operate at their longer ranges after a warp in, instaed of burning away to get to this range why not have them in a different squad and "squad warp" instead of wing/fleet warp. Give the squad commanders a bit more to do than just being a massive blob
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.02.09 17:54:00 - [152] Edited by: Bagehi on 09/02/2010 17:54:25 Originally by: Spugg Galdon And if beams and rails have their ranges nerfed they are forced to fit more range mods which sacrifice damage mods to get to this magical figure of 180km and then DPS will start to look the same would it not? Also if you want your longer ranged weapons to operate at their longer ranges after a warp in, instaed of burning away to get to this range why not have them in a different squad and "squad warp" instead of wing/fleet warp. Give the squad commanders a bit more to do than just being a massive blob Because it takes 30-60 minutes to pull the fleet together as is. Organizing it further, by range, would leave the fleet at the undock point for another 30 minutes while the FC moves people based on their ship - because you can't rely on the pilots to get into the right wings when they only have "capital" and "support" options, let alone "capital" "170km" "200km" 220km". Not to mention the range distribution is not even - leading to inefficient usage of the 256 pilot cap on fleets (means even more "fleets" to make the fleet). If FCs could move "everyone flying an Apoc" in one move, this idea might be reasonable, but they can't. So, it takes too long and is less efficient than the current method for forming a fleet. Fix Local
Tagami Wasp Caldari Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.02.09 19:42:00 - [153] Originally by: Spugg Galdon Stuff for fleet warfare, a topic he knows little about as he told us, but tries to understand it. Always think of the lowest denominator. If you nerf ranges, the new operating range of the fleet will be the nerfed one. Because you need a good number of people to break RR. For example, if the enemy jumps in our HAC camp with 8 Guardians as support, tickling him from 150Km away does nothing. Our gang needs all ships at approximately 80Km, doing max damage hoping to break tank, before RR settles in. Being further away gives no advantage, damage is needed. All the theoretical stuff you talk about have been put to the crucible of real game engagements and all data converge to the view I offer. If you want to see where I got my experience on fleet fights, you are welcome to come to 9UY-4. Please do not view this as a flame, but it is not constructive to go up to a guy riding a GSXR-1000RR and tell him: "I've never riden a bike, but I can tell you how to ride this one." You are pretty much doing the same thing here, sorry to tell you. Ride tight, mate. ------------ Railgun performance required fix: - +15% railgun damage modifier - +10% PG for Caldari railgun ships
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.02.09 20:00:00 - [154] Originally by: Tagami Wasp Originally by: Spugg Galdon Stuff for fleet warfare, a topic he knows little about as he told us, but tries to understand it. Always think of the lowest denominator. If you nerf ranges, the new operating range of the fleet will be the nerfed one. Because you need a good number of people to break RR. For example, if the enemy jumps in our HAC camp with 8 Guardians as support, tickling him from 150Km away does nothing. Our gang needs all ships at approximately 80Km, doing max damage hoping to break tank, before RR settles in. Being further away gives no advantage, damage is needed. All the theoretical stuff you talk about have been put to the crucible of real game engagements and all data converge to the view I offer. If you want to see where I got my experience on fleet fights, you are welcome to come to 9UY-4. Please do not view this as a flame, but it is not constructive to go up to a guy riding a GSXR-1000RR and tell him: "I've never riden a bike, but I can tell you how to ride this one." You are pretty much doing the same thing here, sorry to tell you. Ride tight, mate. Sounds like a fellow gixxer rider. I would tweak the analogy a little though. Just because you own and ride a sport bike, even if you are a weekend track rider, does not mean you could race on a superbike circuit. There is a huge difference between riding/racing by yourself and fighting for the apex through corners in a tight knot of bikes that all perform and are ridden differently. Just because a Mega is a wonderful solo ship doesn't mean it functions well in a fleet. Fix Local
Altaica Amur Aliastra	Posted - 2010.02.09 20:30:00 - [155] Quote: At issue is the Rokh only does more damage than other ships in the narrow 230km-250km range. Less then that actually, at best 240-250km at worst 248-250km, falloff from a 230 optimal apoc covers up all the less then optimal usage of rails. Quote: And if beams and rails have their ranges nerfed they are forced to fit more range mods which sacrifice damage mods to get to this magical figure of 180km and then DPS will start to look the same would it not? No, it wouldn't as most fits already include 3x damage mods and reducing range alone dosen't change the base characteristics of the weapons. Beam weapons just do more damage then rails, it's sorta their thing. Also assuming there's no change relative to one and other rails would still have their entire damage ramp up to spike covered by tachyon falloff, only at optimal+ ranges would they have and advantage and then it would be marginal. What we're asking for here is that for 10km in either direction from it's optimal for their t2 range ammo both beams and rails should have top damage over other weapons systems falloff/t1 ammo. Currently that exists for lasers through the entire gamut of ranges and for rails right around the lock limit, this has to come earlier and the only way to do that is some sort of damage increase, be it through RoF or damage mod.
Likth	Posted - 2010.02.10 16:49:00 - [156] I approve of hybrid balancing efforts in general
Hotako	Posted - 2010.02.11 03:13:00 - [157] Yes
Tagami Wasp Caldari Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.02.11 20:47:00 - [158] Bump, because railguns are used by 50% of EVE and more. ------------ Railgun performance required fix: - +15% railgun damage modifier - +10% PG for Caldari railgun ships
Red Raider Airbourne Demons DeMoN's N AnGeL's	Posted - 2010.02.12 01:00:00 - [159] After reading the entire thread I agree with Tagami's proposal conditionally. As a mission runner myself I am curious as to how this would affect the PVE aspects of the game. Oddly enough I actually fly a Rohk most of the time because I like how it looks and tanks plus I haven't fired a missile since they removed missile AoE back in like 05. Casual gamer so I could care less about optimal income/time ratio's. Sometimes people forget that they are playing for fun and all. Anyways... Wouldn't this seriously impact the mission community in terms of the DPS output of Gallante battleship, BC, destroyer, and cruiser hulls? Not that seeing fewer Ravens would bother me but the unintended side effect of this could be even more farming. Wouldn't this push the Kronos in a league of its own while the other Marauders would get left behind? The Vargur already plays little role in the game at all though I enjoy flying it as well. The bonus's may need to be ship specific to avoid an unintended overpowering of ships used for different purposes. Excellent work so far though.
Tagami Wasp Caldari Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.02.12 16:48:00 - [160] Edited by: Tagami Wasp on 12/02/2010 16:47:56 Quick answer: Golem does 900K dps (Siege) out to 45Km (drones included), Kronos does 760dps (425mm) @ 36+30 Km (drones included). So, a railgun damage increase by 15% will take Kronos to 875. I don't think that will make it the new FOTM. Golem will still be the best. ------------ Railgun performance required fix: - +15% railgun damage modifier - +10% PG for Caldari railgun ships

Altaica Amur Aliastra	Posted - 2010.02.12 18:57:00 - [161] Also where PvE is concerned missiles and drones will always rule without very large damage bonuses being applied to other weapons systems simply due to the importance of being able to pick damage types. A 1200 dps railboat ( for example ) would be quite fun fighting against guristas, but would find itself suffering greatly against Sansha due to only half of it's damage having much of an effect.
Red Raider Caldari Airbourne Demons DeMoN's N AnGeL's	Posted - 2010.02.12 18:59:00 - [162] Originally by: Tagami Wasp Edited by: Tagami Wasp on 12/02/2010 16:47:56 Quick answer: Golem does 900K dps (Siege) out to 45Km (drones included), Kronos does 760dps (425mm) @ 36+30 Km (drones included). So, a railgun damage increase by 15% will take Kronos to 875. I don't think that will make it the new FOTM. Golem will still be the best. Sounds reasonable enough to me. I would imagine the advantages even themselves out between defender missiles and tracking speed.
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.02.12 20:05:00 - [163] Originally by: Tagami Wasp Edited by: Tagami Wasp on 12/02/2010 16:47:56 Quick answer: Golem does 900K dps (Siege) out to 45Km (drones included), Kronos does 760dps (425mm) @ 36+30 Km (drones included). So, a railgun damage increase by 15% will take Kronos to 875. I don't think that will make it the new FOTM. Golem will still be the best. Before someone pipes up and says "but the Kronos is a blaster ship..." With blasters fitted on the Kronos, you have to use Null, 2 tracking computers (optimal) and 2 tracking enhancers to get 17km+33km for range (kill the computers and you have 15km+26km). Either way, Null does 948 dps (with 2 mag stabs) at optimal (and you have no option for longer range). Void can get you up to 1123 dps, but at a massive range of 8.8km+10km. The Golem rolls in with rage torps and 2 ballistic controls at 27km and 1098 dps. Additionally, it has the ability to swap for range, giving it 45km with 819 dps. And this is all without bringing the Paladin in to make everyone else feel inadequate. Fix Local
Red Raider Caldari Airbourne Demons DeMoN's N AnGeL's	Posted - 2010.02.12 20:50:00 - [164] Yeah but you really don't want to use a blaster fitted ship in missions since many ships will orbit outside the range of your guns. The disparity between the Marauders is another debate entirely and since I don't really pvp I don't really get involved with that side of the discussion. My main concern is that pvp centric players really only care about the ISK generated by mission runners and not the balancing issues that could greatly effect that economy by accident and create more threadnaughts whining about mission runners. Marauders are a tricky beast though since they seem to be built for PVE but can be employed with great effectiveness in PVP as well(if your willing to risk that kind of ISK). Most mission runners have moved or want to move into Marauders or Command BC's for obvious reasons and I don't see any issues with the rail boost for rail fit BC's of any type. They will still lag far behind the alternatives. Strategic cruisers are also making a big dent as I have been told the Caldari one is better at PVE than a Golem though I doubt that.
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.02.12 21:38:00 - [165] Originally by: Red Raider Strategic cruisers are also making a big dent as I have been told the Caldari one is better at PVE than a Golem though I doubt that. This is incorrect. My Golem has twice the dps and ehps of my Tengu. The Tengu's superiority is it can be fit for running missions in low sec. But these are missile ships, we're talking about how wimpy rail ships are in this thread. Fix Local
Tagami Wasp Caldari Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.02.13 07:03:00 - [166] Absolutely right, if we want to do a fair comparison, we should use a Paladin, turret ship and armor tank like the Kronos. Can anyone provide a cookie cutter fit for a Paladin? I really have not ever tried to fit one and I will take the suggestions of people more experienced in it than me. Then we can compare how a Rail Kronos vs a Beam Paladin performs. Don't forget this is a thread about boosting railguns. ------------ Railgun performance required fix: - +15% railgun damage modifier - +10% PG for Caldari railgun ships
Venkul Mul	Posted - 2010.02.13 07:28:00 - [167] The big difference between Kronos and Golem is that the Golem can select the damage it do, the Kronos can't. So even if the Kronos get approximately the same damage of a Golem it is outperformed by it in missions against enemies that aren't kin/therm weak. Similarly the Paladin do only EM/therm, so the Golem outperform it when the targets are vulnerable to kinetic or explosive attacks. So, mission wise, a buff to railguns would help missioners against part of the enemies, leaving the Golem still ahead if you can't cherry pick your missions. As lasers and hybrids do split damage you need target with low resists to two kind of damage to reach the same efficiency of the Golem, that can concentrate his damage against the lowest resist of the enemy. Against Sleepers the situation can be different.
Fille Balle Ballbreakers R us	Posted - 2010.02.13 14:37:00 - [168] Originally by: Tagami Wasp Absolutely right, if we want to do a fair comparison, we should use a Paladin, turret ship and armor tank like the Kronos. Can anyone provide a cookie cutter fit for a Paladin? I really have not ever tried to fit one and I will take the suggestions of people more experienced in it than me. Then we can compare how a Rail Kronos vs a Beam Paladin performs. Don't forget this is a thread about boosting railguns. Right, couldn't really fit all the stuff on the Beam pally, but here's what I've come up with (bearing in mind, these are all optimized for mission optimals): [Paladin, Cookie eater] Large Armor Repairer II Armor EM Hardener II Armor Thermic Hardener II Damage Control II 3x Heat Sink II 100MN Afterburner II Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range 2x Cap Recharger II 4x Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L 2x Large Capacitor Control Circuit I 730 dps @ 52km optimal + 13km falloff [Paladin, Beams] Armor Thermic Hardener II Armor EM Hardener II Imperial Navy Large Armor Repairer Damage Control II 3x Heat Sink II Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range 100MN Afterburner II 2x Cap Recharger II 4x Tachyon Beam Laser II, Multifrequency L Large Ancillary Current Router I Large Capacitor Control Circuit I 753 dps @ 38km optimal + 32km falloff [Kronos, Rails] 3x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Armor Kinetic Hardener II Armor Thermic Hardener II Damage Control II Large Armor Repairer II 100MN Afterburner II Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range 2x Cap Recharger II 4x 425mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge L 2x Large Capacitor Control Circuit I 601 dps @ 41km optimal + 39km falloff Seems to me the rails fall short. Let's try a rokh for more range: [Rokh, Rails] 2x Power Diagnostic System II 3x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Shield Boost Amplifier II Dread Guristas X-Large Shield Booster Caldari Navy Ballistic Deflection Field Caldari Navy Heat Dissipation Field Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range 100MN Afterburner II 8x 425mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge L 3x Large Capacitor Control Circuit I 481 dps @ 62km optimal + 39km falloff Not that I think Marauders are a good benchmark for comparing turrets, but I think any theories about Kronos becoming OP have been disproven by the above setups. The above are all mission setups, but as Marauders are hrdle ever used for anything else, I think that's reasonable.
Tagami Wasp Caldari Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.02.13 16:30:00 - [169] It's not fair to compare the ships using Tachyons and 425mms (Tachyons require so much more PG) and the real equivalence is Mega Beams anyway. So to do the comparison, I used a Paladin with 3 x T2 heatsinks and a Kronos with 3x T2 magstabs, both firing close range high dps T1 ammo (I know that Paladins use AN Multis but Kronos pilots can't afford using CN AM all the time, so I had to make an assumption. So: Paladin (T2 MegaBeams/ T1 Multis/ 3 T2 Heatsinks): 697 @ 30+ 20Km (tracking 0.01914) Kronos (T2 425mms/ T1 AM/ 3 T2 Magstabs): 601 @ 36+ 30Km (tracking 0.01653) 697/601= 1.16 ... See a pattern here? And that does not take into consideration that the Paladin can use Tachyons which take it up to 753 @ 33+25 (tracking 0.0174). As a final note, you can't really compare rail Kronos to Vargur, cause Vargur just screams Autocannons (70 Km fallof with Barrage? WTF?) What we consistently see is that as far as turrets go, railguns lack by at least 16% to lazors, which is the closest W/S in relation due to cap usage and range/tracking. I think so far we have conclude that Rails really need a boost to their damage by 15% both in PvP setups and in PVE. Once more, I would like to see if anyone in the CSM has taken note or not, and if they feel that there is more justification to be supplied. Also, if you agree and support this proposal, ask your corpmates to add their vote. ------------ Railgun performance required fix: - +15% railgun damage modifier - +10% PG for Caldari railgun ships
Fille Balle Ballbreakers R us	Posted - 2010.02.14 01:35:00 - [170] Edited by: Fille Balle on 14/02/2010 01:37:20 Originally by: Tagami Wasp It's not fair to compare the ships using Tachyons and 425mms (Tachyons require so much more PG) and the real equivalence is Mega Beams anyway. So to do the comparison, I used a Paladin with 3 x T2 heatsinks and a Kronos with 3x T2 magstabs, both firing close range high dps T1 ammo (I know that Paladins use AN Multis but Kronos pilots can't afford using CN AM all the time, so I had to make an assumption. So: Paladin (T2 MegaBeams/ T1 Multis/ 3 T2 Heatsinks): 697 @ 30+ 20Km (tracking 0.01914) Kronos (T2 425mms/ T1 AM/ 3 T2 Magstabs): 601 @ 36+ 30Km (tracking 0.01653) 697/601= 1.16 ... See a pattern here? And that does not take into consideration that the Paladin can use Tachyons which take it up to 753 @ 33+25 (tracking 0.0174). As a final note, you can't really compare rail Kronos to Vargur, cause Vargur just screams Autocannons (70 Km fallof with Barrage? WTF?) What we consistently see is that as far as turrets go, railguns lack by at least 16% to lazors, which is the closest W/S in relation due to cap usage and range/tracking. I think so far we have conclude that Rails really need a boost to their damage by 15% both in PvP setups and in PVE. Once more, I would like to see if anyone in the CSM has taken note or not, and if they feel that there is more justification to be supplied. Also, if you agree and support this proposal, ask your corpmates to add their vote. Well, all the fits I listed work as far as grid goes, so I think it is a fair comparison. You can try to load them up in eft yourself to check. The beam pally is also cap stable without AB and LAR running. Besides, no matter how much you twist it around, the rails still fall short. The tiny little bit of extra range just doesn't justify the massive drop in dps/tracking. Edit: all the other setups (apart from the rohk) are cap stable without the AB running.

Tagami Wasp Caldari Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.02.14 09:04:00 - [171] Originally by: Fille Balle Besides, no matter how much you twist it around, the rails still fall short. The tiny little bit of extra range just doesn't justify the massive drop in dps/tracking. Edit: all the other setups (apart from the rohk) are cap stable without the AB running. I am not twisting anything around. I say it straight as a ruler. Rails need 15% more damage and Caldari railboats need 10% more grid. ------------ Railgun performance required fix: - +15% railgun damage modifier - +10% PG for Caldari railgun ships
Liang Nuren No Salvation War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.02.14 09:20:00 - [172] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 14/02/2010 09:20:48 Originally by: Tagami Wasp I am not twisting anything around. I say it straight as a ruler. Rails need 15% more damage and Caldari railboats need 10% more grid. I still contend that more range would not hurt my feelings - otherwise I can get behind this. :) -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire
Tizian Enel Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.02.14 16:55:00 - [173] Supporting, though the solution need not be exactly what was proposed in the OP. Someone mentioned that by nerfing laser/projectile range, those ships would fit more range mods to compensate. From my limited sniper bs experience (mostly eft), at least on projectile ships it wouldn't work like that. They already fit 3 or 4 range mods, another range mod would give less effective dps than a damage mod most likely. If fleets do manage the whole 'different ranged ships warp in at different distances' then it could have some merit, I just don't see it ever working in practice in the 100+ man sniper fleets.. any benefit will be lost to complexity. Increasing ROF and decreasing cap usage was suggested as well. This would increase lag, and already in some fights guns will get stuck etc, making alpha much more useful than high rof or even dps. Best to fix lag though, rather than balance around it, but it's worth noting anyway. Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
R4zGr1z	Posted - 2010.02.14 18:53:00 - [174]
Merrizo Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.02.14 22:13:00 - [175]
Ekrund	Posted - 2010.02.15 07:18:00 - [176] Sounds win if balanced right.
Aard'vark	Posted - 2010.02.15 07:19:00 - [177]
Exie Endless Possibilities Inc. Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.02.15 18:59:00 - [178] E... We be Jammin'
Red Raider Caldari Airbourne Demons DeMoN's N AnGeL's	Posted - 2010.02.15 20:22:00 - [179] Originally by: Tagami Wasp Originally by: Fille Balle Besides, no matter how much you twist it around, the rails still fall short. The tiny little bit of extra range just doesn't justify the massive drop in dps/tracking. Edit: all the other setups (apart from the rohk) are cap stable without the AB running. I am not twisting anything around. I say it straight as a ruler. Rails need 15% more damage and Caldari railboats need 10% more grid. I don't think Fille was trying to disparage your efforts but "no matter how you look at it" would probably have been better wording since twisting implies falsifying information. As for the setups listed I would not run any of them except in specific conditions. I have explained to mission runners many times that cap stable is overrated. Your tank simply needs to hold out long enough to kill everything else and since most runners use marauders to salvage missions then you generally just let everything get within tractor range. I don't see beams used that often either since you can still get really good ranges with pulses for taking out those turrets placed at ridiculous ranges. So the lack of ammo clogging up the hold furthers the ability of lasers to lead the pack IMHO. That's not even taking into consideration that the Kronos is the only Marauder that got resistance upgrades that were not in line with its tanking type. Vargur 35% increase to shield resistances, 18.125% increase to armor. Kronos 25% increase to shield resistances, 24.375% increase to armor. Paladin 20% increase to shield resistances, 29.375% increase to armor. Golem 27.5% increase to shield resistances, 23.125% increase to armor. So yeah I agree that a railgun boost as listed by the OP will have virtually no change at all other than to make existing railboats viable alternatives to the FOTM.
Fille Balle Ballbreakers R us	Posted - 2010.02.15 21:44:00 - [180] Originally by: Red Raider I don't think Fille was trying to disparage your efforts but "no matter how you look at it" would probably have been better wording since twisting implies falsifying information. As for the setups listed I would not run any of them except in specific conditions. I have explained to mission runners many times that cap stable is overrated. Your tank simply needs to hold out long enough to kill everything else and since most runners use marauders to salvage missions then you generally just let everything get within tractor range. I don't see beams used that often either since you can still get really good ranges with pulses for taking out those turrets placed at ridiculous ranges. So the lack of ammo clogging up the hold furthers the ability of lasers to lead the pack IMHO. That's not even taking into consideration that the Kronos is the only Marauder that got resistance upgrades that were not in line with its tanking type. Vargur 35% increase to shield resistances, 18.125% increase to armor. Kronos 25% increase to shield resistances, 24.375% increase to armor. Paladin 20% increase to shield resistances, 29.375% increase to armor. Golem 27.5% increase to shield resistances, 23.125% increase to armor. So yeah I agree that a railgun boost as listed by the OP will have virtually no change at all other than to make existing railboats viable alternatives to the FOTM. Actually, that statement wasn't aimed at Tagami, but never mind. The reason I posted those setups was to show some fits that work, and that all looked more or less the same. That way no one can argue that one was fitted better/different than the other. I also included both beams and pulses in order to show how ill the rails perform in comparison to both.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: 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.