EVE Search - Dread Not? A Question for CCP Abathur

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Dread Not? A Question for CCP Abathur

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.01.07 17:08:00 - [31] Originally by: Mavnas Sounds like there's a need for faction/T2 carriers that are more awesome than basic carriers, can still dock, but cheaper and weaker than super carriers. Maybe you missed the part about supercarriers and titans eating caps for a light midnight snack. A faction/T2 carrier in today's Eve would be nothing more than a 5 billion ISK piece of supercapital bait. I damn sure wouldn't fly it. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.01.07 17:14:00 - [32] Originally by: Izuru Hishido Maybe it is where you are, but every engagement I've seen motherships in combat, they really did need the extra HP buff to carry out their role of...anti-capital! Field some dreads first, tbh. Supercaps should die when vastly outnumbered by regular capitals. Quote: Carriers aren't there to support the dreads, they're there so that they can keep the 20-80b fat fleet assets alive. Yeah, God forbid that carriers have a use other than repping your supercaps. Quote: You'd never see a supercapital fleet deploy if it was just supercapitals But we have seen this all the time since Supercarriers were buffed - in increasing frequency no less. Well, you're right. They usually have a cyno ship too. Quote: I think I like it more the way it is now, where it takes 10+ DD's to instantly kill a mothership. And they break the rest of the game by being totally immune to small gangs, etc. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Mona X Caldari Red Federation	Posted - 2011.01.07 17:31:00 - [33] Originally by: Liang Nuren IIRC Nozh actually suggested SCs that could dock. Give that man a raise. Join Eve-Online, meet interesting people, grief them.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2011.01.07 17:36:00 - [34] Quote: You'd never see a supercapital fleet deploy if it was just supercapitals Lol, nice troll mate. Granted they need a cyno ship and often also bridge in a few hictors/dictors, but tell me what is the ideal support ship for a supercap? Exactly, another supercap. Supercaps are so versatile there is never a reason to use another ship (well minus dictors/hictors then).
Mavnas	Posted - 2011.01.07 17:43:00 - [35] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Mavnas Sounds like there's a need for faction/T2 carriers that are more awesome than basic carriers, can still dock, but cheaper and weaker than super carriers. Maybe you missed the part about supercarriers and titans eating caps for a light midnight snack. A faction/T2 carrier in today's Eve would be nothing more than a 5 billion ISK piece of supercapital bait. I damn sure wouldn't fly it. -Liang Yes, but it would be the biggest dockable ship, meaning some people would fly them and lose them. It would be a nice ISK sink. Or maybe some of that awesomeness would be some sort of anti-super cap bonus. Or maybe some sort of more specialized logistics role or something.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.01.07 17:48:00 - [36] Originally by: Mavnas Yes, but it would be the biggest dockable ship, meaning some people would fly them and lose them. It would be a nice ISK sink. Ship losses are ISK faucets, fyi. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Izuru Hishido Amarr Lethal Dosage. Violent Society	Posted - 2011.01.07 17:49:00 - [37] Edited by: Izuru Hishido on 07/01/2011 17:56:59 Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Izuru Hishido Maybe it is where you are, but every engagement I've seen motherships in combat, they really did need the extra HP buff to carry out their role of...anti-capital! Field some dreads first, tbh. Supercaps should die when vastly outnumbered by regular capitals. Completely agreed. You field 20 supercapitals, either titans or motherships along with eighty dreads and seventy carriers, its more than likely that anything you shoot at will die. My hurrang with Pohbis' point is that were I in the supercap, I'd like to live for at least two minutes instead of instapopping from dread fire. Quote: But we have seen this all the time since Supercarriers were buffed - in increasing frequency no less. Well, you're right. They usually have a cyno ship too. Not...exactly the point I was trying to make. You field a fleet of pure supercaps with no support carriers or subcaps alongside them to kill off whatever dictors/hics spontaneously get bridged onto you, then you're not gonna see them survive many engagements. Sure, they'll probably get away with it the first time, maybe even a second time, but by that time other major alliances will take note and they'll go 'hey, fairly easy kills.' Furb: Ehhh...I can kinda see where you're coming from with having the motherships support themselves, but you just need a wall of carriers to protect against fleets of supercaps. Quote: And they break the rest of the game by being totally immune to small gangs, etc. -Liang And Battlecruiser fleets break the game against BS fleets. And battleships break the game against most smaller things. And Carriers break the game against T1 cruisers. Not seeing your point, since you don't chase after supercap fleets, or even a solo supercap without a cyno ready to assist. At least having a titan standing by to bridge in BS and hics would make it worthwhile if the small gang's FC wanted to commit suicide. The game isn't broken if you just don't have the numbers to compete. Sorry to tell you a truth you don't want to hear, but you need numbers to compete, as well as competent pilots. "The point of war is not to die for your country, its to make the other bastard die for his."
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.01.07 17:49:00 - [38] Originally by: Mavnas Yes, but it would be the biggest dockable ship, meaning some people would fly them and lose them. It would be a nice ISK sink. Faction ships/items that come from drops aren't ISK sinks at all if you neglect market taxes - they simply move ISK from one location to another. LP stores are generally ISK sinks, but only sink a tiny fraction of the output ISK. OTOH, faction items are scarce, there's a "high demand", they cost time to get, and its pure PVP to sell them. :) Sorry for the tangent. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Izuru Hishido Amarr Lethal Dosage. Violent Society	Posted - 2011.01.07 17:52:00 - [39] Originally by: Kyle Sucks Originally by: Izuru Hishido Now if I were to put 100 dreadnoughts on the field instead, assuming optimal skills, each dreadnought would do about 3,000 DPS. So you would get 300,000 DPS. You would need over 200 carriers to remote tank anything to survive that 43. With some margin. Fair enough. And Mav, a T2/shiny faction carrier would be nice, but frankly, it is just bait unless you live somewhere completely out of the way and in the middle of nowhere. "The point of war is not to die for your country, its to make the other bastard die for his."
Mavnas	Posted - 2011.01.07 18:04:00 - [40] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Mavnas Yes, but it would be the biggest dockable ship, meaning some people would fly them and lose them. It would be a nice ISK sink. Ship losses are ISK faucets, fyi. Even with uninsurable T2/faction ships? Hmm... maybe they could make them only available in BPC form, or add a hefy ISK price tag to go with the LP cost.
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.01.07 18:06:00 - [41] Originally by: Izuru Hishido Quote: But we have seen this all the time since Supercarriers were buffed - in increasing frequency no less. Well, you're right. They usually have a cyno ship too. Not...exactly the point I was trying to make. You field a fleet of pure supercaps with no support carriers or subcaps alongside them to kill off whatever dictors/hics spontaneously get bridged onto you, then you're not gonna see them survive many engagements. Sure, they'll probably get away with it the first time, maybe even a second time, but by that time other major alliances will take note and they'll go 'hey, fairly easy kills.' Ehhh...I can kinda see where you're coming from with having the motherships support themselves, but you just need a wall of carriers to protect against fleets of supercaps. There are problems with your assertion: - Titan Doomsdays do not work in low sec. - HIC Bubbles do not work in low sec. - Dictors do not work in low sec. - Anchored Bubbles do not work in low sec. - Low sec does not have 'major alliances' with dozens of supercarriers, Titans, and HICs on standby at all times. Honestly, I'd say that supercarriers have no natural predators other than other supercarriers in low sec. Maybe you'd be in favor of outright banning supercapitals from low sec? :) Quote: Quote: And they break the rest of the game by being totally immune to small gangs, etc. -Liang And Battlecruiser fleets break the game against BS fleets. And battleships break the game against most smaller things. And Carriers break the game against T1 cruisers. Not seeing your point, since you don't chase after supercap fleets, or even a solo supercap without a cyno ready to assist. At least having a titan standing by to bridge in dreads and hics would make it worthwhile if the small gang's FC wanted to commit suicide. The game isn't broken if you just don't have the numbers to compete. Sorry to tell you a truth you don't want to hear, but you need numbers to compete, as well as competent pilots. Logging off is not the answer if: - a BS fleet gets tackled by a BC fleet - a HAC fleet gets tackled by a BS fleet (lol?) - a carrier gets tackled by a cruiser fleet etc. Supercarriers have more EHP than large POSes for crying out loud. Maybe they're meant to withstand the rigors of 0.0 warfare... fine... then **ing keep them there. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.01.07 18:12:00 - [42] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 07/01/2011 18:12:46 Originally by: Mavnas Even with uninsurable T2/faction ships? The only possible costs for creating a faction ship: - LP store costs (Frequently is 0 since the ship didn't come from an LP store, can be millions of ISK) - Build costs (a few thousand ISK) - Market costs (a couple million tops) So for a dropped Mach BPC we'd see about 3 million ISK in ISK sinks for a 900M ISK Battleship - and then the faucet part comes from the insurance when you blow the thing up. Yeah, to one person, it looks like a 900M ISK loss... but in the grand scheme of things, the other guy has 880 mil of profit... and that profit still exists. Quote: Hmm... maybe they could make them only available in BPC form, or add a hefy ISK price tag to go with the LP cost. That wouldn't change the nature of the system... and would really nerf pirate mission running and buff ratting/plexing/anoms. Pirate mission running already sucks as an activity... why would you want to nerf it more? -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.01.07 18:13:00 - [43] Originally by: Mavnas Originally by: Tippia Ship losses are ISK faucets, fyi. Even with uninsurable T2/faction ships? All ships are insured to at least 40% of their base value, and this pays out when the ship is destroyed. If you pay more, you get more, but the payout will always cover the cost and then some, so no matter what, ship destruction generates ISK. Note however that I'm being very strict about the meaning of "ISK faucet" here. Even if a ship loss causes you to lose a lot of wealth, it is still an ISK faucet because it causes ISK to be added to the economy. The actual loss you're experiencing is rather an item loss, which is a different thing altogether. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Xia Xiou	Posted - 2011.01.07 18:40:00 - [44] Edited by: Xia Xiou on 07/01/2011 18:42:00 How difficult is it to shoot down those fighter bombers?
Mavnas	Posted - 2011.01.07 18:53:00 - [45] Originally by: Liang Nuren The only possible costs for creating a faction ship: - LP store costs (Frequently is 0 since the ship didn't come from an LP store, can be millions of ISK) - Build costs (a few thousand ISK) - Market costs (a couple million tops) Well, if you add an ISK component to the LP store cost, that first one could be meaningful. Make the new ships' BPC not drop anywhere for free. Maybe if that ISK component were as big or bigger than the max insurance payout. (This isn't hard. For a faction carrier the max payout would be a tiny fraction of its actual market value.) For a T2, I can see the loss as not being a huge ISK sink, but it is a huge time/material sink. All the time miners put into mining the stuff to make it. I guess I'd like to see mining be worth more, but at the same time I can see how that would just encourage more bots .
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.01.07 18:54:00 - [46] Originally by: Xia Xiou Edited by: Xia Xiou on 07/01/2011 18:42:00 How difficult is it to shoot down those fighter bombers? A flight of Cyclops has: - 100000 shields [ 0 / 0.2 / 0.4 / 0.6 ] - 120000 armor [ 0.6 / 0.35 / 0.35 / 0.1 ] - 180000 structure = ~500K Thermal EHP (25K each * 20) -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.01.07 19:06:00 - [47] Originally by: Mavnas Well, if you add an ISK component to the LP store cost, that first one could be meaningful. Make the new ships' BPC not drop anywhere for free. I'm ok with buffing the pirate LP stores that way, but the ISK + LP cost is already pretty significant. The cost you see on the market accounts for the mission runner's time and very very real RISK in running these missions in some of the most hostile space in the game. Quote: Maybe if that ISK component were as big or bigger than the max insurance payout. (This isn't hard. For a faction carrier the max payout would be a tiny fraction of its actual market value.) Sure, there's an insurance modifier for each ship class. Adjust it so that your ship is worth basically nothing as far as insurance goes. I think you're focusing a bit too much on the fact that ship losses are ISK faucets though... its already damaging enough to a personal wallet to lose a faction ship - no need to make it worse by artificially increasing the prices (more ISK cost in the LP store, more scarcity) or removing what little insurance payout there already is. Quote: For a T2, I can see the loss as not being a huge ISK sink, but it is a huge time/material sink. All the time miners put into mining the stuff to make it. I guess I'd like to see mining be worth more, but at the same time I can see how that would just encourage more bots . Yeah, I guess all those hours running missions in hostile 0.0 and dodging hostile bubble camps was easy and gravy and all that. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Mavnas	Posted - 2011.01.07 19:43:00 - [48] I guess ultimately what I'd want is some alternative destination for time/resources/money going into super-cap production right now. Not sure how that would happen. Faced with a similar problem Pirates of the Burning Sea just removed the ability to produce the two biggest classes of ship. Of course that game as different as the biggest battles were 24 v 24, and could be won by bringing more big ships. (Since the other side couldn't rely on numbers, and there's no equivalent to RR; bad maneuverability of the big ships is only an issue in smaller fights.) Also, I'm thinking the biggest ships in EVE are more expensive in relative and absolute terms.
Izuru Hishido Amarr Lethal Dosage. Violent Society	Posted - 2011.01.07 21:32:00 - [49] Originally by: Liang Nuren There are problems with your assertion: - Titan Doomsdays do not work in low sec. - HIC Bubbles do not work in low sec. - Dictors do not work in low sec. - Anchored Bubbles do not work in low sec. - Low sec does not have 'major alliances' with dozens of supercarriers, Titans, and HICs on standby at all times. Honestly, I'd say that supercarriers have no natural predators other than other supercarriers in low sec. Maybe you'd be in favor of outright banning supercapitals from low sec? :) I'd say they do. Hics and a big enough battleship fleet. You go on to mention that most lowsec alliances can't field MS in large numbers. They can use battleships and hics though! You know damn well that wasn't what I was getting at. I agree that what you stated can't be used in lowsec, but you forgot about something. Hics CAN use a script in their bubble generator to create a 28km point that they can use in lowsec, or highsec, or anywhere. Thats been common knowledge for what, forever? Bull** lowsec doesn't hold the attention of major alliances. I've seen IT go into lowsec for tasty kills. I've seen RAWR, INIT, PL, CH, -42- and so many others that would constitute 'large' alliances chase targets into lowsec. No, they don't LIVE in lowsec, that certainly doesn't mean they wouldn't hotdrop something tasty in lowsec. Do motherships need a restriction in lowsec? Abso-ing-lutely. Do they need to be barred from entering lowsec altogether? No. Thats a ridiculous stipulation since many alliances move their supercapitals through lowsec when they're moving from one region to another. I would suggest that since titans can't use their DD in lowsec, motherships should be unable to launch fighterbombers -OR- use their ECM Burst module in lowsec. Or here's a different idea. Make them only able to launch ten drones at a time in lowsec. Any way you cut it, they need some restriction. Maybe CCP will eventually figure that out. Maybe you can whine to some CSM member about it. Hell, maybe a Dev is reading this thread and saw that. Quote:** Logging off is not the answer if: - a BS fleet gets tackled by a BC fleet - a HAC fleet gets tackled by a BS fleet (lol?) - a carrier gets tackled by a cruiser fleet etc. Supercarriers have more EHP than large POSes for crying out loud. Maybe they're meant to withstand the rigors of 0.0 warfare... fine... then **ing keep them there. -Liang A bit of angst I sense there? Been killed by one in lowsec before have you? You're right. An Aeon has the HP of a DG large tower with proper fleet bonuses. A Hel has the HP of a Gallente Large tower with proper fleet bonuses if I'm not mistaken. A supercapital should well...live up to its title. I haven't seen you say a word about the Avatar, the Leviathan, the Erebus or the Ragnarok, all of which have equivalent or greater HP than their racial motherships. Is your next post going to whine about how a DD can instapop any but the most absurdly fit capitals and subcaps, or are you going to make a topic about how that needs to be addressed in the same manner we're going on here. Logging off is a perfectly acceptable tactic if the fleet fielding the supercap did not have the repping ability to keep him alive. Then again, there's the fact that he logged off. His hardeners turn off, his damage control turns off, he just becomes base resists from skills. It goes from shooting a large tower to a medium, and I've seen plenty of fleets that could kill a medium faction tower in under five minutes. When you engage a mothership, you'd damn well better be prepared for what you're engaging, otherwise I'm not gonna offer you any kind of pity for failing terribly at assessing targets. According to your mentality, lets just I think that keeps them perfectly in line with their classification. We're talking about a supercapital, not a Rifter, so you should start thinking in that mindset. "The point of war is not to die for your country, its to make the other bastard die for his."
William Cooly Sol Enterprises	Posted - 2011.01.07 21:40:00 - [50] ITT: Liang says all the good words and doesn't leave any for anyone else. - I troll stupid people.
Izuru Hishido Amarr Lethal Dosage. Violent Society	Posted - 2011.01.07 21:50:00 - [51] Originally by: William Cooly ITT: Liang says all the good words and doesn't leave any for anyone else. ITT: Discussion about how to nerf motherships back into obscurity because the carebears feel threatened by them with me raging about why they got changed in the first place. ^^ Fixed that for you. "The point of war is not to die for your country, its to make the other bastard die for his."
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.01.07 21:55:00 - [52] Originally by: Izuru Hishido I'd say they do. Hics and a big enough battleship fleet. You go on to mention that most lowsec alliances can't field MS in large numbers. They can use battleships and hics though! ... I agree that what you stated can't be used in lowsec, but you forgot about something. Hics CAN use a script in their bubble generator to create a 28km point that they can use in lowsec, or highsec, or anywhere. Thats been common knowledge for what, forever? A few things: - HICs - especially HIC blobs - are not common in low sec because their primary use is crippled. - These HICs cannot be remote repaired while tackling said motherships. - There are entire regions of low sec where there are not enough people to counter one SC - let alone 20+. - Many of the "natural" counters do not exist in low sec. All of this implies that SCs are quite literally more powerful in low sec than in 0.0. Quote: You know damn well that wasn't what I was getting at. Frankly, I don't care what you're getting at. The simple facts: - Supercaps are easily affordable by anyone who wants one, which means that Supercaps are not currently tools of sov warfare. - Even if Supercaps were tools of sov warfare, their usage then should be limited to being tools of sov warfare. Quote: Do motherships need a restriction in lowsec? Abso-**ing-lutely. Do they need to be barred from entering lowsec altogether? No. Thats a ridiculous stipulation since many alliances move their supercapitals through lowsec when they're moving from one region to another. I would suggest that since titans can't use their DD in lowsec, motherships should be unable to launch fighterbombers -OR- use their ECM Burst module in lowsec. How about: - Supercapitals lose ewar immunity in low sec - Supercapitals lose supercapital weapons in low sec (Titan Doomsday, Titan Bridge, Fighter Bombers, ECM Burst, etc) Quote: A bit of angst I sense there? Been killed by one in lowsec before have you? Nope. Just think its incredibly **ed to have packs of 20 deathstars roaming lowsec hot dropping people. Quote: I think that keeps them perfectly in line with their classification. We're talking about a supercapital, not a Rifter, so you should start thinking in that mindset. We're talking about a super capital - a supposed tool of 0.0 sov warfare. You should start thinking in that mindset. -Liang -- Eve Forum *** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Izuru Hishido Amarr Lethal Dosage. Violent Society	Posted - 2011.01.07 22:23:00 - [53] Alright. I propose this. You're an idiot. One of the biggest I've ever seen. I give up. Say whatever you want. I'm through responding to you. "The point of war is not to die for your country, its to make the other bastard die for his."
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.01.07 22:27:00 - [54] Originally by: Izuru Hishido Alright. I propose this. You're an idiot. One of the biggest I've ever seen. I give up. Say whatever you want. I'm through responding to you. What, just because I think that Supercapitals should simply be supercapitals instead of WTFOMGPWNBBQSAUCE WINmobiles? Isn't it a problem when 1000 people are on the field with 200 supercaps and ten supercaps die? That's a big difference from your "I gotta survive more than 10 seconds". -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Zilberfrid	Posted - 2011.01.07 22:57:00 - [55] Simply make them unable to field anything smaller then fighter bombers, and increase FB weapon signature radius. There's your anti capital weapon, hot-drops in low won't be as interesting anymore since, well, you can't do anything about the small ships. DISCLAIMER: I have never flown a capital, let alone a supercapital, and I don't intend to. ------------------------------------- I like to fly around and shoot stuff.
Respute Minmatar The Foreign Legion Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2011.01.08 00:26:00 - [56] Why not make Fighter Bombers extremely fragile to small turret and enemy frig/destroyer fire. The small comming to aid the giants. As it stands Fighters/Fighter Bombers seem to have alot of EHP for their size. If an enemy fleet actually brings along a handful of frigs/destroyers it would make fielding them very costly as they would chew through your fighters/fighter bombers. Have some actual mini dogfights mixed into things. Release the light combat drones... counter with anti support... shrug
NoNah	Posted - 2011.01.08 00:33:00 - [57] Originally by: Respute Why not make Fighter Bombers extremely fragile to small turret and enemy frig/destroyer fire. The small comming to aid the giants. As it stands Fighters/Fighter Bombers seem to have alot of EHP for their size. If an enemy fleet actually brings along a handful of frigs/destroyers it would make fielding them very costly as they would chew through your fighters/fighter bombers. Have some actual mini dogfights mixed into things. Release the light combat drones... counter with anti support... shrug Because of ~~falcon~~ smartbombs Parrots, commence! Postcount: 767482
Templar Dane Amarrian Retribution	Posted - 2011.01.08 02:03:00 - [58] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Izuru Hishido Alright. I propose this. You're an idiot. One of the biggest I've ever seen. I give up. Say whatever you want. I'm through responding to you. What, just because I think that Supercapitals should simply be supercapitals instead of WTFOMGPWNBBQSAUCE WINmobiles? Isn't it a problem when 1000 people are on the field with 200 supercaps and ten supercaps die? That's a big difference from your "I gotta survive more than 10 seconds". -Liang Liang, he seems to be expressing the same butthurt that the nano*s showed when everyone was ***ing about that particular I-WIN button.
Target Painter Minmatar	Posted - 2011.01.08 02:29:00 - [59] Where in lowsec do you guys live where people drop supers routinely?
Liang Nuren	Posted - 2011.01.08 03:04:00 - [60] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 08/01/2011 03:04:57 Originally by: Target Painter Where in lowsec do you guys live where people drop supers routinely? Metropolis sees lots of supercap usage - you'll see the random SC, SC blob (20+), and plenty of Titan bridging. -Liang Ed: Supercaps are so common here that the Minnie militia has two... check the news when you log in for more details. -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.