EVE Search - Drakes - Do they need a nerf?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Drakes - Do they need a nerf?

» 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 - 8 post(s)
Illwill Bill Svea Rike Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2010.10.22 12:50:00 - [241] Wait, there is actually a thread, about nerfing Drakes?! A real thread? With devs posting in it? /me looks out window for flying pigs and falling skies. Originally by: CCP Navigator Great story but you probably want this in CAOD so feel free to post there with your main.
wizard87	Posted - 2010.10.22 13:29:00 - [242] The solo Drake is not overpowered, especially put 1v1 against the Myrmidon, Hurricane or Harbinger. The Drake's advantage is it is a brick with a steady constant DPS. The Myrm doesn't have the same tank and drone DPS is slow and clumsy. The Hurricane is arguably the weakest tank, great DPS but is the most mobile The Harb is great for DPS at good ranges, and a good tank but still not as tanky as a Drake and not very mobile or great at very close range (for example against AB HACs) due to tracking. So the reason you get more Drakes fleets is because they are the best "all rounder", the ship is often previously trained because passive shield tanks are the most effective for PVE (so people normally have some experience flying them already before they PVP). Don't overlook cost either: Shield rigs are relatively cheap compared to armour ones, all the tier 2 BC ship hulls and fittings are relatively cheap compared to BS. I'd argue too cheap relative to most BS prices - by using cruiser sized weapons. Note: you don't lose ISK on a drake, unlike with a Myrm you often lose drones - another disadvantage of Myrms. Then there's Remote Reparing/Shield logistics: Shield recharge is very handy especially in scalable fights. This might seem contrary to popular opinion, but it FORCES the enemy to focus fire more or dramatically lose effectiveness - in order to take down a ship. For example someone shooting an armour buffer on their own by accident or design ina fleet fight will given time remove the ship, or at least make it easier for others to kill later. Not so if they are shooting a Drake - any independant shooting a Drake down to peak recharge is effectively wasting their DPS in a fleet unless the drake is a primary. Shield Logistics are actually also normally superior the bigger the gang/engagement due to the instant nature of shield repairs, and the normally better resistances of shields than armour. To be honest I don't know why there are not more RR Raven gangs, but I guess that is more due to the slower DPS of Torps/Cruise and the vulnerablity to smaller ships than any issue with the Raven/shield RR tactic. Anyway, it is not one thing making the Drake the "best" or "overpowered", it is a combination of things that make it the best of the bunch, especially when grouped that make the drake relatively overpowered. My personal suggestion is to nerf the peak recharge. Make more Drakes be active tankers and have a less sustainable/permanent tank that actually require the pilots to compromised more than just a lack of tackle.
OT Smithers	Posted - 2010.10.22 13:35:00 - [243] Edited by: OT Smithers on 22/10/2010 13:40:56 Originally by: CCP Chronotis As stated in earlier responses which I see some of you skipped(!), we would never nerf the drake because it used missiles and missiles cause additional load, that would be nonsensical indeed as many note. Nonsense. Of course you would. In fact, that is in essense what you said. It is also one of the stated reasons for the rocket "fix." Further, it makes sense. What does not make sense is the silly suggestion that Drakes are in any way overpowered when compared to the other ships in their class -- the numbers simply do not back this up. Nor have you guys lept into action to nerf the other FOTM ships (or fix the obviously broken ones), including those that are so far out of balance that they make a mockery of the word. Clearly "BALANCE" has absolutely nothing to do with development priority. But addressing lag does. Respectfully, if you need to nerf missile ships to keep them out of large fleet PvP that's fine, but don't p*** on the backs of Caldari pilots and then try to tell them its raining.
OT Smithers	Posted - 2010.10.22 13:38:00 - [244] Originally by: Shade Millith Edited by: Shade Millith on 22/10/2010 11:40:29 No Caldari have a good ship finally for PVP, you even say yourself that one by itself isn't OP Quote: Drakes on their own are reasonably balanced Don't screw over small gang's/soloer that use drakes. Why don't you go nerf amarr? I mean Amarr BS's are the most popular for BS gangs and zealots are the ship of choice for A-HAC gangs. Edit: How about you buff raven/rokh so they can fit into BS gangs? Amaar don't fire missiles.
Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.10.22 13:45:00 - [245] ... Or we need more battlecruisers models. Less versatile and more powerful ones. --
Darth Felin	Posted - 2010.10.22 13:53:00 - [246] Edited by: Darth Felin on 22/10/2010 14:03:08 Edited by: Darth Felin on 22/10/2010 14:02:57 Edited by: Darth Felin on 22/10/2010 14:02:31 Edited by: Darth Felin on 22/10/2010 14:01:33 Edited by: Darth Felin on 22/10/2010 14:00:44 Drake is overpowered beyond the doubt, and it always was overpowered in BC class. It is just inflated by current metagame. There are two main reasons why it is so good in gangs: 1a) constant (predictable) DPS within weapon range against most targets 1b) default weapon range is very large 2a) very high resists for t1 ship that allow effective usage of RR 2b) very high EHP buffer (BS level buffer actually) that allow Drake to survive first alfa You can not solve (1) because it is natural feature for missile weapons, and it is hard to change than without complete redesign of weapon system. So you have to take care of second reason. But it is a littlebit tricky as well. It won't work if you will nerf it PG. Even in single LSE configuration it will have better buffer than most ships. You can not nerf CPU too much as it will kill many viable fitting in solo/small gang and won't solve anything for large gang/fleet fitting (PDS -> co-processor). So you can not solve Drake's problem only by fitting nerf. So what is left? Resist bonus - it have to go. It will at the same time decrease ship EHP and RR effect without any collateral effect. Maybe and only maybe it is appropriate to decrease ship PG a little bit as well but it it is a work for CCP balancing department. There are only one question left - what new bonus will replace resist one. It can be standard "T1 caldari" bonus for missile velocity. But I will be really happy if Drake will get one of "T2 caldari" bonuses: "5% bonus to Heavy Missile exposion velocity" or "3% reduction of Heavy Missile damage reduction factor". First bonus is bad imho as it mostly help HAM setups that are close to Amarr than Caldari but latter two are good in solo/small gang and at the same time give almost nothing in large gang/fleet.
Evelgrivion Ignatium.	Posted - 2010.10.22 14:13:00 - [247] Honestly, I really dislike the methods of fitting and flying a Drake; an HP brick that is hindered minimally by capacitor warfare, tracking, range, and is so tough that no sane fleet commander will call them primary over more immediate (and fragile) threats. But, this could be mitigated quite a bit with a simple tweak to the grid requirements of large shield extenders. If they required 50 more grid to fit, a lot of the most common (and overly powerful) setups would no longer work, and would need to be modified. Replacing the Drake's shield resist bonus with a shield capacity bonus, rate of fire bonus, or something off the wall like a signature radius bonus to MWDs would mitigate a lot of my trouble with the ship -- there are only two ways to fit and fly the ship, and differ only in engagement range. In my opinion, there should always be more than "one" way to fit a ship. The Drake is not a ship that pilots feel encouraged to fiddle with.
Doctor Alban	Posted - 2010.10.22 14:15:00 - [248] Many here in this thread already pointed it out: The Drake itself is not OP. Its a very tough BC, but 1on1 it will not rule the BC-Class. Granted, it can win some fights, but it will lose some others too. Its weapon system and characteristics make it great for PvE, but not superior to its rivals in PvP 1on1 or small gang. The problem is: Drake Blobs with Logistic Support, which rule in lagcombat. Nerfing the ship itself will not solve the problem at all, just make AHACs rule again ... Besides, speaking of missiles: yes, they work different from turrets. They will deliver reliable DPS from 0-max range, not caring about transversal at all. Thats nice indeed ... But: they will deliver ZERO DPS over max range, they have no modules to increase range (just rigs and hardwirings), and they will also deal ZERO DPS to any target fast enough / small enough, regardless of its transversal! If there will be changed anything with missiles, make sure they will not get nerfed in comparison to guns ...
Kira Korpii Amarr Pink Bunnies	Posted - 2010.10.22 14:16:00 - [249] In my opinion it is not only drake problem. Of course it is most annoying ship because it can be seen everywhere, almost everyone can fly it and it is used for missions from the very beginning by any new player. Game slowly turns into "drake online". Why? 1) like any battlecruiser it is insanely chip, cost effective (loss after insurance -20m isk) 2) it has not very good DPS, but having 7 launchers it has got HUGE alphastrike and that helps killing everything basically in whole lock range, independent on tracking 0-75km 3) its tank is so impressive you can even throw away some invuls and go with up to 2 ew modules in mid, and it still remains at least good 4) cruiser sized weapons - making sure HACs becoming obsolete, because of very similar mobility(maybe not vagas which is better here) and much lower overall EHP, much higher isk cost 5) easy to roam in, easy to fight blobs in (lagged or not); like mentioned somewhere above it operates usually in ranges you cannot warp to directly with new 5 sec probe time 6) command ships which actually could be very fun to fly for many many players lost purpose with presentation of those insane tier 2 BC's (any field command is worse than properly fitted drake! and they are 3-5 times its price) I know many of those facts repeat here all over again but hey I may try help out :)
Comstr Bat Country Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2010.10.22 14:35:00 - [250] Reduce the Drakes shield resists from 5% per level to 3%. This makes it's tank ability + firepower equal with the other battlecruisers (and perhaps lower it's grid/CPU a small amount to remove one of the shield mod or missile you can currently fit). This also makes it's logistic ability much less for large scale fleet fights. For PvP fleet fights, you also need to nurf the sig radius stacking of tech II cruisers - including AHAC's and Logistics. They would still be very useful in small gangs and roams, but with a higher sig radius they become vulnerable to alpha strike from large scale BS/BC fleets and stealth bomber squadron attacks (due to their higher resists and faster speed, they would still be able to engage and escape slower bomber and BS/BC gangs, but not slug it out with them over time). Increasing sig radius for Logistics also cures their problem of being too effective. They are still very useful on the battlefield, but not at the expense of all other support ships (including having some BC's for anti-cruser work and EW who are currently not needed in place of having more logistics). Heavy Interdictor's are nurfed to a small extent - they become more vulnerable to fighter bomber's that are their main enemies, but this just reinforces the need to nurf fighter bombers vs non-capital targets. The problems with HAM's and Pulse Lasers having a too high effective range + tracking, and blasters having the worse of both, should be dealt with separately. Removing the supremacy of Drake's being able to tank+gank and AHAC's being able to speed+gank+sigradiustank is a big enough step to see how it goes first.

Aessoroz	Posted - 2010.10.22 14:56:00 - [251] Edited by: Aessoroz on 22/10/2010 15:05:12 Edited by: Aessoroz on 22/10/2010 15:04:29 Edited by: Aessoroz on 22/10/2010 15:03:30 Edited by: Aessoroz on 22/10/2010 15:02:41 Edited by: Aessoroz on 22/10/2010 15:01:25 Essentially what is being suggested is to nerf a ship that is being overused for reason, there's a lack of combat ability in other ships that makes the drake extremely extremely for fighting gang types that can't be fought any other way. Take sniper hac gangs for example, they will melt anything that comes close to them including frigates, drakes are the only ship that can tank their massive alpha and still hit them for a good amount of damage when the the target has 20 logis on him. No other bc class ship can survive such a fight, hurricanes are twigs, brutix and ferox may as well be removed from the game until hybrids get reworked and harbi's are for pos bashes. Battleships could be used but they are painfully and will just be outmanuevered by the hac gang extremely quickly. Sure one could just counter with hacs themselves but when you have an alliance of 2000+ NEW players vs. an alliance of older players, you will not be able to get the numbers to even open a fleet of hacs due to training time. If you are going to nerf a drake you need to nerf the reasons why they are used so ridiculously much. Let me also point that that nerfing the Drake will then increase the use of the myrmidon which can field a ridiculous shield tank comparable to a Drake and those drones? Well I'm pretty sure they are MUCH worse then any performance use from missiles >:) In fact, I am putting up new fits for fleet myrmidons right now, TO ARMS BROTHERS, MAKE CCP CRY!
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.22 16:14:00 - [252] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 22/10/2010 16:16:52 Originally by: CCP Chronotis Some really good opinions here. Remember this is atypical of our usual communication which comes following on from some action or pending change. Here we are experimenting in communication and catalyzing an open debate on a question posed regarding drake popularity and whether it is due to it being imbalanced and gathering opinion on that. As stated in earlier responses which I see some of you skipped(!), we would never nerf the drake because it used missiles and missiles cause additional load, that would be nonsensical indeed as many note. It's a good approach. Keep it up. :) I want to point out that the problem you're seeing (Drake blobs) has nothing at all to do with passive shield tanking and shield recharge, and everything to do with the utility of resist bonuses vs rep bonuses and awesome damage projection at range. I know I've gone over this before, but I want to one more time since I know you're keeping track of these things: Resist Bonus: - 33% Local Rep Bonus (Requires Cap) - 33% EHP Bonus - 33% Remote Rep Bonus Rep Bonus: - 37.5% Local Rep Bonus (Requires Cap) Obviously there's something dramatically askew here given your own (company) admission that players will bring as many players as they can every time they can. And bear in mind that I think that the Drake is the best close range brawling BC too ... but it's not nearly as pronounced as the above topic. You guys have some pretty good game designers and honestly balance is better than it's been in a long time. So... I'm sure you'll figure something out that doesn't nerf the Drake too hard in non-overpowered areas. :) I am going to ask (pretty please with a cherry on top) that you guys spend a few minutes fixing fittings on frigates and T1 cruisers. There's a lot of ships that are just not really viable ships because their fittings are all jacked up (Navy Slicer, Augorer, Omen, Caracal, etc). Also, if you could do away with the ship tier system I'd <3 you forever. :) -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Sagara Takeda Black Dragon Crime Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.22 16:18:00 - [253] If Drakes suck so much according to all of the Eve players replying to this thread, then why is it that nearly every Eve player is flying one? (especially in nullsec, there are legions of them). The math of this makes a point in itself. If Drakes were just as good as any other BC, then the percentages would be more evenly spread out.
Quesa D00M. Northern Coalition.	Posted - 2010.10.22 16:21:00 - [254] The main reason Drakes fight above their weight class is because of server performance. In high lag situations, MWD can run forever, where normally a Drake would cap out after 3-4 cycles. Lag creates a situation where some damage gets delayed, so every once in a while you'll have 30 seconds worth of missile spamage hit a target at once overwhelming it with alpha. When you are able to perma-mwd around a target at 20-30k, the tracking of the orbited party is not able to keep up but if the cap worked properly in high lag engagements, Drakes wouldn't be able to do that. Put together everything that we've seen in 0.0 in the past year, you'll come up with the conclusion that Drakes perform very well in high lag engagements over any other ship type - the decision has been pretty clear for their high use and now it's caught on, surprise, surprise. In the end, server performance has more to do with the Drake fleets being as popular as they are, than anything else. I would also like to state that Heavy Missiles are the long range variant of the medium missile systems, so shortening the range doesn't make sense. Missiles aren't affected by what maneuvers you are doing (in terms of hit damage), it's only affected by what your target is doing. This whole problem has come to past because of the ineffective use of the weapon class tier system. IE. Focused Pulses for anti-cruiser/frig work and Heavy Pulses for anti-BC/BS work (because of tracking). I had planned on using them to fix fleet lag but was talked out of it. -CCP Zulu
LiMu Bai	Posted - 2010.10.22 16:36:00 - [255] Originally by: Quesa The main reason Drakes fight above their weight class is because of server performance. In high lag situations, MWD can run forever, where normally a Drake would cap out after 3-4 cycles. Lag creates a situation where some damage gets delayed, so every once in a while you'll have 30 seconds worth of missile spamage hit a target at once overwhelming it with alpha. When you are able to perma-mwd around a target at 20-30k, the tracking of the orbited party is not able to keep up but if the cap worked properly in high lag engagements, Drakes wouldn't be able to do that. Put together everything that we've seen in 0.0 in the past year, you'll come up with the conclusion that Drakes perform very well in high lag engagements over any other ship type - the decision has been pretty clear for their high use and now it's caught on, surprise, surprise. Thats exactly how Drakeblobs fight, Ive seen it several times. Full 100% MWD speed the whole duration of the fight, since lag prevents capacitor usage. Drakes are Dodging most of the gunfire with this "tactic" and permanently running away from any close range warpins. Thats also one very big reason why Drakes are overpowered. Most Fleet Drakes also fit speedmods, to exploit this. Of course other ships also can permanrun their MWDs, but turrets can't hit if youre moving with MWD speeds. So all other combat ships cant exploit this no-cap-in-lag stuff with their MWDs. Only Drakes can zoom around with ludicrous speeds and dish out their full dmg....since missiles dont rely on any tracking. Its time for another nanonerf .)
Hesperius Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.22 16:52:00 - [256] Maybe if there was a ship in the game that could stop the RR from happening and be outside of the range of the blob, it wouldn't be so bad. ECM might be a good way to counter it. You would really want to be out at like 150k though. Oh wait you guys *****ed about that ship to no end. Weird that we are seeing this thread now isn't it. Cut to the chase and make Eve into paper rock scissors?
Elyham Senex Legio Get Off My Lawn	Posted - 2010.10.22 17:03:00 - [257] drake nerf, lol. wait until the bears get the side effects of this nerf and the real tears begin. change missile bonus to rockets and watch drakes disappear like you want them to. problem solved.
Bomberlocks Minmatar CTRL-Q	Posted - 2010.10.22 17:40:00 - [258] Would a decent counter to Drakes not be the Ferox? With two TCs, two SeBos and 3 mag stabs a rail Ferox can hit at over 126 kms with Spike. Granted, the DPS is anemic, but enough of them should be able to counter the Drakes with impunity.
Illwill Bill Svea Rike Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2010.10.22 18:51:00 - [259] That would require "fixing" the Ferox. There's a reason why people fit them with AC's. Originally by: CCP Navigator Great story but you probably want this in CAOD so feel free to post there with your main.
Hori To Masuat'aa Matari	Posted - 2010.10.22 18:59:00 - [260] infini cap - lag related, not drake related local rep bonus vs resist bonus - local rep bonus is crap compared to resist bonus missile spam overpowered in fleet fights - lag related silly amount of EHP on drakes - +hp mods related, not drake. everything that's been mentioned that's broken with the drake is not drake related.

Fon Revedhort Monks of War DarkSide.	Posted - 2010.10.22 19:16:00 - [261] Edited by: Fon Revedhort on 22/10/2010 19:18:42 Considering everything is being measured in comparison only, let's go check BC vs Field Command Ships one. It's pretty clear that the difference in tier2 BC vs CS perfomance is lowest at Caldari pair (Nighthawk and its poor man's version - Drake - implemented like 1 year after NH with the only purpose to please penny pinchers, who still want to have a powerful ship). How the hell is it balanced? CCP, ffs, you can't claim that 'command ships are fine as is' (afaik Zulupark posted that when asked whether CCP planned to do something on CS issue... it was like 2 years ago) and say that Drake is fine, too, at the same time. Either boost Command Ships (each one has to be boosted in its own way, with Sleipnir getting the smallest boost) to a proper level or just fix the damn thing already. You've been told a gazillion times that there's always a reason if anything is that popular as Drake currently is. You can't say this is due to Caldari being the most popular race at the characters distribution over EVE - we all know how easy it is to cross-train, especially when it comes to battlecruisers. You can't say this is due to the ship being invulnerable like the nano of the older days either. It's cheap, expendable, mind-numbing boring to fly, yet it gets the things done and that's why folks choose it over anything else. What's the damn point in taking Nighthawk when you can get 95% of it for a fraction of a cost? No go compare Sleinir with Cyclone and Hurricane. At the very least the Sleipnir is different to both of them (no split weapons compared to Cyclone, shield tank bonus + the other slot layout compared to Hurricane). Go make Drake a diverse mixture of guns (or drones)/missiles and things will become much more interesting at the whole. Command Ships are to be ultimate ships of medium-size weaponry. Not tech3 and much less crappy battlecruisers. ---[center] Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Carebear Collector	Posted - 2010.10.22 19:33:00 - [262] the real issue is caldari and missiles here. caldari race and missiles should be removed from game. all caldari accounts banned for choosing the pve only race. issue fixed, right whiners?
Meeko Atari	Posted - 2010.10.22 20:53:00 - [263] Just Face it, The Dev said it himself... They do not want Caldari ships to participate in PVP Train a Zealot like the rest of EVE.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.22 21:49:00 - [264] Originally by: Meeko Atari Just Face it, The Dev said it himself... They do not want Caldari ships to participate in PVP Train a Zealot like the rest of EVE. The devs are engaging us in a dialog and specifically say they aren't suggesting that at all, and are providing other boosts to Caldari ships in this patch. And still you want to go be a whiny little ***. you. They're doing it right for once and you people are still *ing. -Liang -- Eve Forum *** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Bomberlocks Minmatar CTRL-Q	Posted - 2010.10.22 22:23:00 - [265] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Meeko Atari Just Face it, The Dev said it himself... They do not want Caldari ships to participate in PVP Train a Zealot like the rest of EVE. The devs are engaging us in a dialog and specifically say they aren't suggesting that at all, and are providing other boosts to Caldari ships in this patch. And still you want to go be a whiny little ***. you. They're doing it right for once and you people are still ***ing. -Liang QFT^10 I honestly don't understand the level of backwardness in some of these people. Drakes ARE currently the FOTM in medium/long range combat, being able to take on anything in sufficient numbers. And that's just fine. (And I don't even fly the damn things). And then CCP finally boosts Rockets and gives the Hawk a mild PG boost. And you still get immensely challenged individuals complaining about Caldari being poor at PvP.
Noemi Nagano	Posted - 2010.10.22 22:23:00 - [266] As a long time Caldari-pilot I admit nerfing the Drake is something which would hurt a lot - it seems to be the only viable combat vessel for Caldari atm, all other fleet ships are just support/ewar or outclassed by their counterparts. If its a MWD/lag/missile-problem pls try to fix it in another way - I dont know how exactly, but nerfing the Drake will just get some other ship take its role. Adjusting Command Ships to be better than they are now and esp. in comparison to their t1 tier 2 cousins should be done soon though. And like others before already said: missile ranges might be long, esp. for heavy missile - but they have no falloff, and there damage can be reduced with defenders (although not viable in fleet pvp :D :D ). If you change something with them (=nerf), then dont forget about the drawbacks in comparison to other systems.
Super Chair Caldari Flying Furniture Emporium	Posted - 2010.10.22 22:52:00 - [267] Drakes are fine.
OT Smithers	Posted - 2010.10.23 00:36:00 - [268] Originally by: Bomberlocks I honestly don't understand the level of backwardness in some of these people. Drakes ARE currently the FOTM in medium/long range combat, being able to take on anything in sufficient numbers. Yes. However... Drakes, by the Devs own admission, objective comparisson, and observation are NOT overpowered in anything less than lag conditions. The entire BC class of ships is arguable the most balanced in the entire game. Drakes are not the FOTM in low-se or in small gangs in 0.0. They are one of three FOTM's in large fleet battles in 0.0. That's it. The devs want to end this. The PROBLEM is that Drakes are not overpowered to begin with so the only way to end its use is to break the freaking ship. Simple enough?
Pinky Starstrider	Posted - 2010.10.23 01:41:00 - [269] Or just rework the missile tracking system, and fix the lag created by that. Solution to drones causing lag was reduce drone numbers, solution to missiles causing lag reduce missile numbers. Easiest way to do that without killing a well balanced ship is to just get rid of missile travel, make the damage instant and use the Distance/Velocity of missiles (currently the time it takes a missile to hit a target once launched) as a variable addition to missile launcher delay. Keeps the DPS of missile chuckers in place, and reduces missiles being objects in space, and thus the requirement of tracking them through space. All it is, is an animation issue get rid of the object from space and it won't be an issue.
GamTen	Posted - 2010.10.23 02:15:00 - [270] So everyone who says that the drake's resists are overpowered? The ferox has the same shield resists and bonus per level. Is the ferox overpowered too?



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.