EVE Search - Fixing Battlecruisers

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Fixing Battlecruisers

» 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)
Slithereen	Posted - 2004.12.09 01:09:00 - [1] Edited by: Slithereen on 09/12/2004 01:47:07 I feel along with so many others, that battlecruisers are not exatly right, and don't really match to the description posted in the blocs that makes a BC a deadly threat to a BS. They are nice, but in a sort of gimped just a bit better than heavy cruiser sort of way. I also think that some of the current configs and bonuses do not seem to match well with their racial descriptions and themes. Brutix--- 25% increase in powergrid 10% increase in base cap 10% increase in cap recharge Drone space from 1000m3 to 1200m3 Prophecy--- 25% increase in powergrid 6 turrets changed to 7 turrets allowable. Reason. This ship is another gunboat and it must emphasize turret use. Ferox--- 25% increase in power grid 5 Turrets changed to 7 turrets allowable 5 Missile launchers changed to 7 missile launchers Thus you can pick from being an all gunboat and being an all missile boat consistent to the ship's dual personality. Cyclone--- 25% increase in power grid 5 Turrets allowable changed to 7 Battlecruisers are gunboats. They must show for it. _______________________________________________ "Is it me or the bad guys just getting totally pathetic?"---Clover, Totally Spies, "Hope is wasted on the Hopeless."---Mandy, The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy. "Stars are holes in the sky from which the light of the Infinite shine through."---Confucius.
Slithereen	Posted - 2004.12.09 01:09:00 - [2] Edited by: Slithereen on 09/12/2004 01:47:07 I feel along with so many others, that battlecruisers are not exatly right, and don't really match to the description posted in the blocs that makes a BC a deadly threat to a BS. They are nice, but in a sort of gimped just a bit better than heavy cruiser sort of way. I also think that some of the current configs and bonuses do not seem to match well with their racial descriptions and themes. Brutix--- 25% increase in powergrid 10% increase in base cap 10% increase in cap recharge Drone space from 1000m3 to 1200m3 Prophecy--- 25% increase in powergrid 6 turrets changed to 7 turrets allowable. Reason. This ship is another gunboat and it must emphasize turret use. Ferox--- 25% increase in power grid 5 Turrets changed to 7 turrets allowable 5 Missile launchers changed to 7 missile launchers Thus you can pick from being an all gunboat and being an all missile boat consistent to the ship's dual personality. Cyclone--- 25% increase in power grid 5 Turrets allowable changed to 7 Battlecruisers are gunboats. They must show for it. _______________________________________________ "Is it me or the bad guys just getting totally pathetic?"---Clover, Totally Spies, "Hope is wasted on the Hopeless."---Mandy, The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy. "Stars are holes in the sky from which the light of the Infinite shine through."---Confucius.
Kaylona Tso	Posted - 2004.12.09 04:15:00 - [3] Brutix : Agree but it should be 1250m3 drone bay Prophecy Agreed Ferox : 7 launchers but change turret bonus into a cap bonus for turret use THEN reduce the overall cap of the ferox by 20% to compensate missiles taking no cap. Will make you compensate for damage by using the lows for Dmods and range mods. Cyclone agreed but instead do : 8/4/4 but 8 Turrets in an 8/4 config -----
Kaylona Tso	Posted - 2004.12.09 04:15:00 - [4] Brutix : Agree but it should be 1250m3 drone bay Prophecy Agreed Ferox : 7 launchers but change turret bonus into a cap bonus for turret use THEN reduce the overall cap of the ferox by 20% to compensate missiles taking no cap. Will make you compensate for damage by using the lows for Dmods and range mods. Cyclone agreed but instead do : 8/4/4 but 8 Turrets in an 8/4 config -----
YuuKnow	Posted - 2004.12.09 04:28:00 - [5] Edited by: YuuKnow on 09/12/2004 04:35:31 I think my Prophecy is good where it is now. 6 heavy pulses is good enough now. Only thing I would suggest is one and only one of these brutix changes -grid increase from 1000 to 1100 -drones increase to match thorax 2000 (this is my favorite) -addition of one more low slot (thorax has 5 low slots, mega has 7 low slots, brutix should have 6). Just one of these changes should be enough. The rest of the BC seem great. Don't want to make them too good or they will quickly become the flavor of the month.
YuuKnow	Posted - 2004.12.09 04:28:00 - [6] Edited by: YuuKnow on 09/12/2004 04:35:31 I think my Prophecy is good where it is now. 6 heavy pulses is good enough now. Only thing I would suggest is one and only one of these brutix changes -grid increase from 1000 to 1100 -drones increase to match thorax 2000 (this is my favorite) -addition of one more low slot (thorax has 5 low slots, mega has 7 low slots, brutix should have 6). Just one of these changes should be enough. The rest of the BC seem great. Don't want to make them too good or they will quickly become the flavor of the month.
Masta Killa	Posted - 2004.12.09 04:57:00 - [7] What's....wrong with you?? Can't you people realize that battlecruisers are designed to kill equal and lesser targets? Then you can get your buddies with you in battlecruisers if you are so anxious for killing battleships. It would be stupid, wrong and oh yeah... -stupid- to up the powergrid (more firepower/tanking), cap recharge (more tanking) and drone space (firepower). A 30 mil ship that requires barely -any- training shouldn't be able to face a decently fitted battleship and WIN. If you aren't happy with your battlecruiser then sell it, mine veldspar in 0.9 space for a few more days and buy a tier 1 bs. OK? -------------------------------------- We are The Collective. Resistance is futile.
Masta Killa	Posted - 2004.12.09 04:57:00 - [8] What's....wrong with you?? Can't you people realize that battlecruisers are designed to kill equal and lesser targets? Then you can get your buddies with you in battlecruisers if you are so anxious for killing battleships. It would be stupid, wrong and oh yeah... -stupid- to up the powergrid (more firepower/tanking), cap recharge (more tanking) and drone space (firepower). A 30 mil ship that requires barely -any- training shouldn't be able to face a decently fitted battleship and WIN. If you aren't happy with your battlecruiser then sell it, mine veldspar in 0.9 space for a few more days and buy a tier 1 bs. OK? -------------------------------------- We are The Collective. Resistance is futile.
Blacklight	Posted - 2004.12.09 05:07:00 - [9] Originally by: Masta Killa What's....wrong with you?? Can't you people realize that battlecruisers are designed to kill equal and lesser targets? Then you can get your buddies with you in battlecruisers if you are so anxious for killing battleships. It would be stupid, wrong and oh yeah... -stupid- to up the powergrid (more firepower/tanking), cap recharge (more tanking) and drone space (firepower). A 30 mil ship that requires barely -any- training shouldn't be able to face a decently fitted battleship and WIN. If you aren't happy with your battlecruiser then sell it, mine veldspar in 0.9 space for a few more days and buy a tier 1 bs. OK? What he said. Eve Blacklight Style
Blacklight	Posted - 2004.12.09 05:07:00 - [10] Originally by: Masta Killa What's....wrong with you?? Can't you people realize that battlecruisers are designed to kill equal and lesser targets? Then you can get your buddies with you in battlecruisers if you are so anxious for killing battleships. It would be stupid, wrong and oh yeah... -stupid- to up the powergrid (more firepower/tanking), cap recharge (more tanking) and drone space (firepower). A 30 mil ship that requires barely -any- training shouldn't be able to face a decently fitted battleship and WIN. If you aren't happy with your battlecruiser then sell it, mine veldspar in 0.9 space for a few more days and buy a tier 1 bs. OK? What he said. Eve Blacklight Style

Slithereen	Posted - 2004.12.09 07:18:00 - [11] Edited by: Slithereen on 09/12/2004 07:21:49 I think Battlecruisers should be justly threatening to battleships [as the devs said so in their blogs], and it should not be feeling like a 10 to 15 milllion dollar glorified cruiser that it is now. It should feel it should justify the 22.5 mil to 30mil price tag. It should be hairy and it should be scary. _______________________________________________ "Is it me or the bad guys just getting totally pathetic?"---Clover, Totally Spies, "Hope is wasted on the Hopeless."---Mandy, The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy. "Stars are holes in the sky from which the light of the Infinite shine through."---Confucius.
Slithereen	Posted - 2004.12.09 07:18:00 - [12] Edited by: Slithereen on 09/12/2004 07:21:49 I think Battlecruisers should be justly threatening to battleships [as the devs said so in their blogs], and it should not be feeling like a 10 to 15 milllion dollar glorified cruiser that it is now. It should feel it should justify the 22.5 mil to 30mil price tag. It should be hairy and it should be scary. _______________________________________________ "Is it me or the bad guys just getting totally pathetic?"---Clover, Totally Spies, "Hope is wasted on the Hopeless."---Mandy, The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy. "Stars are holes in the sky from which the light of the Infinite shine through."---Confucius.
Xtro 2	Posted - 2004.12.09 07:22:00 - [13] A battlecruiser is just that, a cruiser for battle, with better armour/hull/shields, your still only meant to dish cruiser damage to larger targets, your not meant to have a cheap battleship gank machine. If you want battleship firepower, buy a battleship, if you want a heavily armoured cruiser, then buy a battlecruiser, if you want a far tougher cruiser with massive skill requirements then buy a heavy assault cruiser. Battlecruisers are fine as they are, i tested a prophecy and it works very well for what its meant to do, which is paste 1 or more cruisers. __________________________________________ Hell is nothing more than an office with fluorecent lights.
Xtro 2	Posted - 2004.12.09 07:22:00 - [14] A battlecruiser is just that, a cruiser for battle, with better armour/hull/shields, your still only meant to dish cruiser damage to larger targets, your not meant to have a cheap battleship gank machine. If you want battleship firepower, buy a battleship, if you want a heavily armoured cruiser, then buy a battlecruiser, if you want a far tougher cruiser with massive skill requirements then buy a heavy assault cruiser. Battlecruisers are fine as they are, i tested a prophecy and it works very well for what its meant to do, which is paste 1 or more cruisers. __________________________________________ Hell is nothing more than an office with fluorecent lights.
Nikolai Tupolev	Posted - 2004.12.09 08:25:00 - [15] Edited by: Nikolai Tupolev on 09/12/2004 08:33:24 Battle-cruisers, as originally intended, were ships designed with battleship caliber weapons, with a cruisers armor and speed. This was mainly illustrated best during WW1. German battleships were armed with ten 11 or 12inch guns (except 2 with 8 x 15inch), had a speed of 21knots and a main armor belt of 11 to 13inchs. The battlecruisers were also armed with ten 11 or eight 12inch guns, but had speeds of 27 to 30knots and armor belt of 8 to 11inches max. The british warships ran along the same lines, just had slighly higher caliber guns (12 and 13.5inch). Also take note on the HMS Hood and the Bismarck, the Hood was around 42,000 tons with 8 15inch guns, a speed of 29knots and had a main armor belt of 12inches. The Bismarck was over 50,000tons, had 8 modern 15inch guns (45cal. compared to the Hoods 42cal.), capable of making 30knots and had a main armor belt of 14-16inches. The only major difference between the 2 ships (simplified) is about 6inches of deck armor. The Hood suffered greatly at having a measly 4inch deck armor, while the Bismarck had around 10. Therefore I agree that the Eve battlecruisers are just a little on the weak side (hell i think the bs' are a bit pathetic...lol). Battle-cruisers were originally designed to use their higher speeds to outmanuever battleships and have the firepower to deal crippling damage to them.
Nikolai Tupolev	Posted - 2004.12.09 08:25:00 - [16] Edited by: Nikolai Tupolev on 09/12/2004 08:33:24 Battle-cruisers, as originally intended, were ships designed with battleship caliber weapons, with a cruisers armor and speed. This was mainly illustrated best during WW1. German battleships were armed with ten 11 or 12inch guns (except 2 with 8 x 15inch), had a speed of 21knots and a main armor belt of 11 to 13inchs. The battlecruisers were also armed with ten 11 or eight 12inch guns, but had speeds of 27 to 30knots and armor belt of 8 to 11inches max. The british warships ran along the same lines, just had slighly higher caliber guns (12 and 13.5inch). Also take note on the HMS Hood and the Bismarck, the Hood was around 42,000 tons with 8 15inch guns, a speed of 29knots and had a main armor belt of 12inches. The Bismarck was over 50,000tons, had 8 modern 15inch guns (45cal. compared to the Hoods 42cal.), capable of making 30knots and had a main armor belt of 14-16inches. The only major difference between the 2 ships (simplified) is about 6inches of deck armor. The Hood suffered greatly at having a measly 4inch deck armor, while the Bismarck had around 10. Therefore I agree that the Eve battlecruisers are just a little on the weak side (hell i think the bs' are a bit pathetic...lol). Battle-cruisers were originally designed to use their higher speeds to outmanuever battleships and have the firepower to deal crippling damage to them.
Shadowsword	Posted - 2004.12.09 09:35:00 - [17] Originally by: Slithereen Brutix--- 25% increase in powergrid 10% increase in base cap 10% increase in cap recharge Drone space from 1000m3 to 1200m3 I'd agree with the drone space change, and I didn't tested enough to give my opinion on cap changes, but the grid is the only thing that prevent the brutix to be almost as damaging that a blasterthron. Originally by: Slithereen Prophecy--- 25% increase in powergrid 6 turrets changed to 7 turrets allowable. Reason. This ship is another gunboat and it must emphasize turret use. I'd keep the missile launcher to have defenders, if they get fixed one day, but 7 turrets + 6 low slots would mean a mini-gankaggedon for sure. I think hte prophecy is fine as it is. Originally by: Slithereen Ferox--- 25% increase in power grid 5 Turrets changed to 7 turrets allowable 5 Missile launchers changed to 7 missile launchers Thus you can pick from being an all gunboat and being an all missile boat consistent to the ship's dual personality. This is the thing I disagree with most. Can you tell me how you're going to defend against a Ferox orbiting you at 30km with a 4.1km/s sutained speed and lobbing missiles at you? Your proposed changes would make life even easier to all those lamers who confuse the Ferox with a giant interceptor... Besides, the Ferox is meant to be a big Moa, a railgun platform, why should it get an all-out missile slot config? I'll also point out that no ship can choose between full gun or full missile setups. Why should the Ferox have that wide a choice? Originally by: Slithereen Cyclone--- 25% increase in power grid 5 Turrets allowable changed to 7 Battlecruisers are gunboats. They must show for it. Minmatar ships have always used a mix of missiles and guns. Putting 7 turret slots on the Cyclone would make it look like a Gallente or Amarr ship.
Shadowsword	Posted - 2004.12.09 09:35:00 - [18] Originally by: Slithereen Brutix--- 25% increase in powergrid 10% increase in base cap 10% increase in cap recharge Drone space from 1000m3 to 1200m3 I'd agree with the drone space change, and I didn't tested enough to give my opinion on cap changes, but the grid is the only thing that prevent the brutix to be almost as damaging that a blasterthron. Originally by: Slithereen Prophecy--- 25% increase in powergrid 6 turrets changed to 7 turrets allowable. Reason. This ship is another gunboat and it must emphasize turret use. I'd keep the missile launcher to have defenders, if they get fixed one day, but 7 turrets + 6 low slots would mean a mini-gankaggedon for sure. I think hte prophecy is fine as it is. Originally by: Slithereen Ferox--- 25% increase in power grid 5 Turrets changed to 7 turrets allowable 5 Missile launchers changed to 7 missile launchers Thus you can pick from being an all gunboat and being an all missile boat consistent to the ship's dual personality. This is the thing I disagree with most. Can you tell me how you're going to defend against a Ferox orbiting you at 30km with a 4.1km/s sutained speed and lobbing missiles at you? Your proposed changes would make life even easier to all those lamers who confuse the Ferox with a giant interceptor... Besides, the Ferox is meant to be a big Moa, a railgun platform, why should it get an all-out missile slot config? I'll also point out that no ship can choose between full gun or full missile setups. Why should the Ferox have that wide a choice? Originally by: Slithereen Cyclone--- 25% increase in power grid 5 Turrets allowable changed to 7 Battlecruisers are gunboats. They must show for it. Minmatar ships have always used a mix of missiles and guns. Putting 7 turret slots on the Cyclone would make it look like a Gallente or Amarr ship.
Nighthawk	Posted - 2004.12.09 09:54:00 - [19] Edited by: Nighthawk on 09/12/2004 09:56:29 boosting battlecruisers anymore would make heavy assaults a waste of training time and isk........ u want a better battlecruiser, train for a heavy assault!!! --- All hail to the mighty space hamster!!! ---
Nighthawk	Posted - 2004.12.09 09:54:00 - [20] Edited by: Nighthawk on 09/12/2004 09:56:29 boosting battlecruisers anymore would make heavy assaults a waste of training time and isk........ u want a better battlecruiser, train for a heavy assault!!! --- All hail to the mighty space hamster!!! ---

Cartiff	Posted - 2004.12.09 11:11:00 - [21] Prophecy rocks atm i jumped into a gate camp on my own in my prophecy 1x Rupture 2x Rifter 1x Kestral 1x Taranis mate in a crow jumped in after the shooting started and helped on the kestral Killed the rupture, both rifters and the kestral and i was on 72% struc (only had passive armor tanking) after that battle. Taranis ran for its life lol After that i came up against a Ferox and a destroyer (forget what type of dessy) Killed both of them, then their BS's jumped in and killed me. So i would say Prophecy is rather nice Cartiff, CEO Euphoria Released NBSI 4TW
Cartiff	Posted - 2004.12.09 11:11:00 - [22] Prophecy rocks atm i jumped into a gate camp on my own in my prophecy 1x Rupture 2x Rifter 1x Kestral 1x Taranis mate in a crow jumped in after the shooting started and helped on the kestral Killed the rupture, both rifters and the kestral and i was on 72% struc (only had passive armor tanking) after that battle. Taranis ran for its life lol After that i came up against a Ferox and a destroyer (forget what type of dessy) Killed both of them, then their BS's jumped in and killed me. So i would say Prophecy is rather nice Cartiff, CEO Euphoria Released NBSI 4TW
Mad Bomber	Posted - 2004.12.09 11:19:00 - [23] Edited by: Mad Bomber on 09/12/2004 11:22:31 Originally by: Cartiff Prophecy rocks atm i jumped into a gate camp on my own in my prophecy 1x Rupture 2x Rifter 1x Kestral 1x Taranis mate in a crow jumped in after the shooting started and helped on the kestral Killed the rupture, both rifters and the kestral and i was on 72% struc (only had passive armor tanking) after that battle. Taranis ran for its life lol After that i came up against a Ferox and a destroyer (forget what type of dessy) Killed both of them, then their BS's jumped in and killed me. So i would say Prophecy is rather nice Exactly, tanks well against most smaller targets, but cant face a BS. As it should be ALL ships must be weak to another else everyone would just fly them. BC are fine as they are. Fitting a 100MN AB will nerf your setup cause you arent meant to
Mad Bomber	Posted - 2004.12.09 11:19:00 - [24] Edited by: Mad Bomber on 09/12/2004 11:22:31 Originally by: Cartiff Prophecy rocks atm i jumped into a gate camp on my own in my prophecy 1x Rupture 2x Rifter 1x Kestral 1x Taranis mate in a crow jumped in after the shooting started and helped on the kestral Killed the rupture, both rifters and the kestral and i was on 72% struc (only had passive armor tanking) after that battle. Taranis ran for its life lol After that i came up against a Ferox and a destroyer (forget what type of dessy) Killed both of them, then their BS's jumped in and killed me. So i would say Prophecy is rather nice Exactly, tanks well against most smaller targets, but cant face a BS. As it should be ALL ships must be weak to another else everyone would just fly them. BC are fine as they are. Fitting a 100MN AB will nerf your setup cause you arent meant to
Arleonenis	Posted - 2004.12.09 11:27:00 - [25] all battlecruisers are raither nice, maybe except cyclone, if its guns bonus was changed to resistance bonus as have ferox it would make those 4 med 4 low slots less painfull in way of tanking, it damage however still wouldnt be great (projectiles are crap)
Arleonenis	Posted - 2004.12.09 11:27:00 - [26] all battlecruisers are raither nice, maybe except cyclone, if its guns bonus was changed to resistance bonus as have ferox it would make those 4 med 4 low slots less painfull in way of tanking, it damage however still wouldnt be great (projectiles are crap)
Estios	Posted - 2004.12.09 12:01:00 - [27] I feel along with so many others that some people fail to see bigger pictures when discussing huge game balance issues to further their own needs I'd LOVE to see your thoughts on Heavy Assault Cruisers then. You are complaining about the PG on a ship which any noob can learn to fly with a months worth of training and asking for more. A heavy assualt cruiser costs twice as much as BC and takes approx 10 times as long to train for and its skill costs approx 10 times as much to buy. You even have the audacity to say the BC is somehow gimped because its only slightly BETTER than a Heavy Cruiser (your words) ....OH ....MY ....GOD. You cannot see whats wrong with that statement ??? A Heavy assualt has less PG, less CPU, less shields, less armour, less slots, less drone bay etc etc etc etc. Remember this is GAME and is about balance ....not always about what it says in the ships description. If they start giving out more PG to a BC they better damn well start giving out more PG to all those ships people spent 10 times as long training for. There is nothing wrong with BC's when you compare them to other ships in game !!! Im seeing Ferox's in PVP more often than any other ship atm. Yet this forum seems to be full of people who spent the 20 mins it took to learn to fly this ship after patch wanting a WIN ALL button added to their BC. Spiffy bumper stickers saying 'I Hate Balance' should also be requested me thinks So HMV consider Andy Williams and Dean Martin to be "easy listening" do they? Tell that to my mate Dave, he's been deaf for 20 years.
Estios	Posted - 2004.12.09 12:01:00 - [28] I feel along with so many others that some people fail to see bigger pictures when discussing huge game balance issues to further their own needs I'd LOVE to see your thoughts on Heavy Assault Cruisers then. You are complaining about the PG on a ship which any noob can learn to fly with a months worth of training and asking for more. A heavy assualt cruiser costs twice as much as BC and takes approx 10 times as long to train for and its skill costs approx 10 times as much to buy. You even have the audacity to say the BC is somehow gimped because its only slightly BETTER than a Heavy Cruiser (your words) ....OH ....MY ....GOD. You cannot see whats wrong with that statement ??? A Heavy assualt has less PG, less CPU, less shields, less armour, less slots, less drone bay etc etc etc etc. Remember this is GAME and is about balance ....not always about what it says in the ships description. If they start giving out more PG to a BC they better damn well start giving out more PG to all those ships people spent 10 times as long training for. There is nothing wrong with BC's when you compare them to other ships in game !!! Im seeing Ferox's in PVP more often than any other ship atm. Yet this forum seems to be full of people who spent the 20 mins it took to learn to fly this ship after patch wanting a WIN ALL button added to their BC. Spiffy bumper stickers saying 'I Hate Balance' should also be requested me thinks So HMV consider Andy Williams and Dean Martin to be "easy listening" do they? Tell that to my mate Dave, he's been deaf for 20 years.
Mikelangelo	Posted - 2004.12.09 12:40:00 - [29] Barely two weeks have gone by since Exodus and the battlecruiser's introduction, and people are screaming "Fix the BCs!" Come on. Do you honestly think that CCP is gonna fix something that they've just introduced? They've got a list of bugs that's at least several pages long for bugs that have been around for MONTHS, that they haven't done SQUAT about FOR MONTHS. Like anybody is going to give a rat's behind about "fixing battlecruisers".
Mikelangelo	Posted - 2004.12.09 12:40:00 - [30] Barely two weeks have gone by since Exodus and the battlecruiser's introduction, and people are screaming "Fix the BCs!" Come on. Do you honestly think that CCP is gonna fix something that they've just introduced? They've got a list of bugs that's at least several pages long for bugs that have been around for MONTHS, that they haven't done SQUAT about FOR MONTHS. Like anybody is going to give a rat's behind about "fixing battlecruisers".



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.