EVE Search - Sticky:Balancing Feedback: Tier3 Battlecruisers

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Sticky:Balancing Feedback: Tier3 Battlecruisers

» 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 - 5 post(s)
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 25	Posted - 2011.11.09 01:19:00 - [331] - Quote Fix the goddam large missiles those sux as much as blasters. And after that say ,"we dont want the naga to apply too much dps vs smaller ships" then why not apply that to the tornado as well? Oh it is matar it has to be imbalanced.... yeah... Also which would be more fearfull 500dps cruise missile nagas fleet from which smallsign+speed +missile delay would lower it to around 30% or less or a tornado fleet each doing 8000 alpha with 500 dps insta hit dmg... yeah i know in which fleet i wouldnt like to be. Torpedose are so useless , even if you find a bs worthy to hit, probably you would be better in another ship with another weapon system. If you want to keep torpedos sux so much vs smaller targets at least give them advantage vs bs +larger like +30% dps. So make naga able to use rails, probably optimal+rof bonus or something usefull , blasters are not needed. Gall ships for that anyway.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 67	Posted - 2011.11.09 02:00:00 - [332] - Quote The Talos really wants to be shieldtanked (since as a blasterboat it needs speed / agility). Swap a low for (preferably) 2 mids (one if you're feeling stingy)-- this will let it fit a minimal shield tank, plus a scram and a web, both of which it needs to hit anything smaller than a titan with blasters' terrible tracking. So far the only fit I've flown thats remotely useable has been an electron blaster (for the tracking), passive armor tanked setup with a scram, web, and dual-prop. It's literally the only thing that is at all effective in PvP -- the scram / web are required to track things, the armor tank is the only way to get any ehp out of the ship with 3/4 of the mids used on tackle / prop (1 LSE does not a tank make), and dual-prop is the only way to stay in scram range if you're lucky enough to start your fight there. This setup, while not as utterly useless as a shieldtanked neutron setup (which is fast and agile enough to close range to scram a target, but then can't track it at all and promptly dies due to having only 18k ehp), is still pretty bad. The ****-poor range of electrons, combined with the lower speed and agility of an armor tanked fit, means a few things. First, its often impossible to snag an initial tackle because you're slow. Second, even if you manage to burn into scram range before your opponent can burn away / warp out, by the time you've got there you're already down 1/3 of your armor. By the time you close even further and start doing good damage to your target, you're down to 1/2 armor. Half the time, the target then proceeds to kill you because your dps took so long to apply, isn't that great anyway, and your buffer tank isn't that big. Like I said, a passive armor buffer fit is more useful than a shield setup (which is completely worthless) but is still quite suicidal to fight with and vastly inferior to any Tornado / Oracle fit. Other people have suggested I use rail fits, but the tracking on those is even worse and I can pilot Tornados and Oracles, both of which will outperform a rail Talos using closerange guns w/ LR ammo loaded. My advice is to make the Talos a shield-tanked ship. Re-work its slot layout so it can fit a scram, web, two tanking mods and a prop mod in the mids, at least. Keep its speed / agility: it needs them. The Tornado is quite fun to fly, and I don't think its nearly as OP as stupid pubbies keep crying that it is. It's nicely constructed-- it has a role and its bonuses and stats suit that role-- it's fast, it does lots of damage to BCs / BS, can hit cruisers and smaller but only at med-long to extra-long ranges and/or when the small ship has low/no transversal. Up close it gets torn to bits by smaller ships, since it can't track them and has no drones (as it should be). It's fast and agile enough to work well in a roaming / HAC gang and will give newer players a supremely useful / practical T1 hull to play with. Keep as is. The Oracle also seemed like an excellent ship-- it makes a nice mini-pulsepoc. Brilliant work. Keep as is. Naga: everyone says it sucks. I wouldn't know, because I didn't fly it :3 (well, actually I did, but only to see if it made a better blaster boat than the Talos-- it does, incidentally, since it can use blasters at long enough range that the tracking on them is sufficient to actually hit targets, something the Talos can't do :\)
Daraja Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2011.11.09 02:43:00 - [333] - Quote Number in [ ] is tier 2 BC speed. Talos 220 [145] Thorax 180 Tornado 225 [165] Rupture 192 Oracle 200 [150] Maller 164 Naga 195 [140] Moa 164 Why are Tier 3 BCs faster than the Tier 3 Cruisers? This means these new BCs will be able to keep tranversal low via their speed advantage and annihilate them. Tier 1 and Tier 2 BCs already make Tech 1 cruisers virtually obsolete, the only advantage the cruiser had was speed and agility. Now the Tier 3 BC actually takes the speed advantage away from that as well.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 67	Posted - 2011.11.09 02:50:00 - [334] - Quote Daraja wrote: Number in [ ] is tier 2 BC speed. Talos 220 [145] Thorax 180 Tornado 225 [165] Rupture 192 Oracle 200 [150] Maller 164 Naga 195 [140] Moa 164 Why are Tier 3 BCs faster than the Tier 3 Cruisers? This means these new BCs will be able to keep tranversal low via their speed advantage and annihilate them. Tier 1 and Tier 2 BCs already make Tech 1 cruisers virtually obsolete, the only advantage the cruiser had was speed and agility. Now the Tier 3 BC actually takes the speed advantage away from that as well. T1 cruisers have been more or less useless for a long ass time now. They're good for funny gimmicks and slosh ops and thats about it. How about instead of complaining you get excited about how there's going to be a new set of ships that are only marginally more skill / isk intensive than cruisers, but will be super useful for PvP?
Daraja Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2011.11.09 03:05:00 - [335] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: T1 cruisers have been more or less useless for a long ass time now. They're good for funny gimmicks and slosh ops and thats about it. How about instead of complaining you get excited about how there's going to be a new set of ships that are only marginally more skill / isk intensive than cruisers, but will be super useful for PvP? I don't disagree, I'm just asking why if they are already useless, make them more so by taking away the only advantage they had over their BC cousins. I prefer a game of options and had hopes that cruisers would be the counter to tier 3 BCs, as they became the counter to Tier 1 & 2 BCs.
Kiev Duran Grand Solar Trinity 11	Posted - 2011.11.09 03:21:00 - [336] - Quote Daraja wrote: Number in [ ] is tier 2 BC speed. Talos 220 [145] Thorax 180 Tornado 225 [165] Rupture 192 Oracle 200 [150] Maller 164 Naga 195 [140] Moa 164 Why are Tier 3 BCs faster than the Tier 3 Cruisers? This means these new BCs will be able to keep tranversal low via their speed advantage and annihilate them. Tier 1 and Tier 2 BCs already make Tech 1 cruisers virtually obsolete, the only advantage the cruiser had was speed and agility. Now the Tier 3 BC actually takes the speed advantage away from that as well. You show me a pilot that flies a Moa, and I'll show you one that has no grasp of EVE combat. I for one am excited that the Caldari might get a combat option that isn't a Drake; because everything else in our arsenal (that doesn't make use of ECM) is either weak to the point of uselessness, or out preformed at it's role in every single way by another race's ship. I'm also quite frustrated that it looks like the Naga will be out preformed at it's role in every single way by another race's ship.
Daraja Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2011.11.09 03:29:00 - [337] - Quote Kiev Duran wrote: You show me a pilot that flies a Moa, and I'll show you one that has no grasp of EVE combat. I for one am excited that the Caldari might get a combat option that isn't a Drake; because everything else in our arsenal (that doesn't make use of ECM) is either weak to the point of uselessness, or out preformed at it's role in every single way by another race's ship. I'm also quite frustrated that it looks like the Naga will be out preformed at it's role in every single way by another race's ship. Again, this is the problem I'm trying to highlight. A Moa (and all cruisers in general) are so outclassed by their BC cousins that they are already useless. Making Tier 3 BCs faster seems to be just salting the wound.
tika te Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 10	Posted - 2011.11.09 04:09:00 - [338] - Quote i have a bit more radical theory (please don't flame, it's just a thought): i also think that there should be some "distance" between ship classes.. cruisers should be far weaker than a bc and ofc much weaker as a battlehip in terms of their hp, but they also should be MUCH harder to hit with larger sized weapons... a battleship should really have HUGE difficulties hitting a moving cruiser, a cruiser same difficulties hitting a frig ... on the other side..a bs should be able to survive the attack of 1-2 cruisers much longer than just few seconds...a cruiser should withstand the attacks of 2-3 frigs without dying in few eyeblinks.. sitting in a larger ship should mean sth....there should be A FAIR EXCHANGE for the sacrifice of agility and speed... i.e. killing a battleship with just 3-4 frigs shoud be an achievement, not just a "he's tackled and will die soon" standard program.. in my oppinion better scaling between ship classes would greatly improve the eve gameplay.. this perhaps better fits in an another thread: somwhere here on the forums so suggested giving lower tier weapons within a size-class better sig resolution. perhaps thats a first step in increasing diversity...i.e. a dual railgun 250mm having resolution of 300m, a 350mm rail a resolution of 350mm and the 425mm staying at 400m. then fitting lower tier weapons wouldn't just be a consideration when you don't have enough PG/CPU to fit higher tiers...
Ja'thaal Deathbringer Switchblade Incorporated DUST ALLIANCE 0	Posted - 2011.11.09 04:34:00 - [339] - Quote Just out of curiosity, when are the devs planning on putting the skins on the ships? We have a basic outline, but I want to see my Oracle glisten as its Mega pulse lasers tear up the battlefield.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 67	Posted - 2011.11.09 05:10:00 - [340] - Quote Daraja wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: T1 cruisers have been more or less useless for a long ass time now. They're good for funny gimmicks and slosh ops and thats about it. How about instead of complaining you get excited about how there's going to be a new set of ships that are only marginally more skill / isk intensive than cruisers, but will be super useful for PvP? I don't disagree, I'm just asking why if they are already useless, make them more so by taking away the only advantage they had over their BC cousins. I prefer a game of options and had hopes that cruisers would be the counter to tier 3 BCs, as they became the counter to Tier 1 & 2 BCs. I mean, you can counter the new BCs with cruisers... you just have to fly them precisely. I just lost a blaster Talos to a Celestis on sisi because it warped on on top of me and scrammed me-- no way to track it. I mean, granted, it was a Talos (they're awful) but any of these new ships will get owned by a cruiser if you can get on top of them.
Daraja Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2011.11.09 05:44:00 - [341] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: I mean, you can counter the new BCs with cruisers... you just have to fly them precisely. I just lost a blaster Talos to a Celestis on sisi because it warped on on top of me and scrammed me-- no way to track it. I mean, granted, it was a Talos (they're awful) but any of these new ships will get owned by a cruiser if you can get on top of them. Celestis base velocity is 39 m/s slower than the Talos. If you are fitted with the same tackle and propulsion as him simply extend range to reduce tranversal to blow him away.
Imrik86 Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates 1	Posted - 2011.11.09 05:44:00 - [342] - Quote Are we getting a fixed Naga? Any DEV can reply, are you taking notes?
Miriiah Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 7	Posted - 2011.11.09 06:30:00 - [343] - Quote Ja'thaal Deathbringer wrote: Just out of curiosity, when are the devs planning on putting the skins on the ships? We have a basic outline, but I want to see my Oracle glisten as its Mega pulse lasers tear up the battlefield. Mega Pulses look like **** anyway compared to what they once were, and the sound effect is horrid so don't worry about it.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 67	Posted - 2011.11.09 10:21:00 - [344] - Quote Daraja wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: I mean, you can counter the new BCs with cruisers... you just have to fly them precisely. I just lost a blaster Talos to a Celestis on sisi because it warped on on top of me and scrammed me-- no way to track it. I mean, granted, it was a Talos (they're awful) but any of these new ships will get owned by a cruiser if you can get on top of them. Celestis base velocity is 39 m/s slower than the Talos. If you are fitted with the same tackle and propulsion as him simply extend range to reduce tranversal to blow him away. Do you know what a small gap that is assuming you're both scrammed and webbed? (its ~15m/s^2) It would take minutes for the Talos to open up any useful kind of range, by which time he'd be dead. Thats assuming the Talos has a web and a scram to counter a hostile cruiser that was set up to kill the new BCs. If he only has a scram and the cruiser has a scram and a web he's completely buggered.
Pinky Denmark The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League 26	Posted - 2011.11.09 10:41:00 - [345] - Quote We cannot afford having battlecruiser outrunning cruisers and HACs no matter how much they need to get INTO range or KITE battleships... Reduce the speeds to make them sane and increase survivability by giving them a smaller signature and more hitpoints (makes them live longer but not easier to keep alive). Also against battleships these ships does not need alpha - reduce the number of guns and compensate with a ROF bonus. It will reduce build cost, lower alpha and keep the same damage. Also I'm still very interested in the afterburner ideas... I'd love to give them either fitting bonus for large afterburners or speed bonus for medium afterburners. Balanced so they will not be faster than MWDing cruisers but still faster than MWDing battleships on the top. Also I'm very interested in listening to how CCP will prevent the Naga from being an abomination. I would be real sad to see Caldari being the only race not getting to use those fine L-cannons on a BC hull. Pinky
Phantomania Alien Ship Builders Caedite Eos 6	Posted - 2011.11.09 11:28:00 - [346] - Quote @ CCP Devs!!! Its gone a little quiet! We have to have new Stats for the troublesome BC's so they can be tried out, stop looking at numbers and just throw them into SiSi. Its easier for you if they get tried out by the testers and if it doesn't work out or is OP...etc. you can just try the next idea, but don't sit scratching your heads trying to work this out on your own. Thats what we're here for! ...TEST... TEST... TEST
Jill Antaris Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 22	Posted - 2011.11.09 11:47:00 - [347] - Quote Pinky Denmark wrote: Also I'm still very interested in the afterburner ideas... I'd love to give them either fitting bonus for large afterburners or speed bonus for medium afterburners. Balanced so they will not be faster than MWDing cruisers but still faster than MWDing battleships on the top. You use 100mn ABs fittings on the Tornado or Oracle just fine. This means larger cuts in other areas(raw EHP, range and dps) but it is perfectly possible and it makes them a lot more survivable against BS weapons within 50km. Requires a 3% grid implant: [Oracle, New Setup 1] Damage Control II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Centii C-Type Adaptive Nano Plating Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Dual Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Dual Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Dual Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Dual Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Dual Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Dual Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Dual Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Dual Heavy Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Medium Energy Locus Coordinator II Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I [Tornado, New Setup 1] Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II Damage Control II LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Caldari Navy Photon Scattering Field Large Shield Extender II Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II, Barrage L Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II, Barrage L Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II, Barrage L Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II, Barrage L Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II, Barrage L Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II, Barrage L Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II, Barrage L Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II, Barrage L Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
Pinky Denmark The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League 26	Posted - 2011.11.09 11:48:00 - [348] - Quote I do agree we need action so we can test this in able time for the launch, however I rather want well thought changes giving us the required time to test and give feedback. Stats changing every other day on test server will be difficult reflecting on. Also I believe it's the same people being resposible for all the balances so lets give them a break for at least 10-15 minutes Pinky EDIT: What is the speed with those 100mn ABs and how do they handle/react with agility and acceleration?
Jill Antaris Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 22	Posted - 2011.11.09 12:01:00 - [349] - Quote Pinky Denmark wrote: EDIT: What is the speed with those 100mn ABs and how do they handle/react with agility and acceleration? Oracle does 1022 m/s and handles like a triple plated Abaddon with a MWD on, but for maneuvering at 40-50km(manual orbiting by slightly adjusting the angle w/o dropping speed or transversal) it is ok. Tornado handles a lot better with a 100mn AB, mostly because you get to the 500-600m/s speed where you really start sig tanking BS a lot quicker. It goes 1318m/s but you rarely archiving this speeds if you try to keep yourself in range to the target.
Phantomania Alien Ship Builders Caedite Eos 6	Posted - 2011.11.09 12:33:00 - [350] - Quote Pinky Denmark wrote: I do agree we need action so we can test this in able time for the launch, however I rather want well thought changes giving us the required time to test and give feedback. Stats changing every other day on test server will be difficult reflecting on. Also I believe it's the same people being resposible for all the balances so lets give them a break for at least 10-15 minutes Pinky EDIT: What is the speed with those 100mn ABs and how do they handle/react with agility and acceleration? My point was that sometimes those well thought changes can come from pilots and trial and error, nothing on SiSi is set in stone but we need to start testing different ideas! Feedback on the current BC's has been Fed!
Bhaal Chinnian Hedion University Amarr Empire 7	Posted - 2011.11.09 12:59:00 - [351] - Quote Pinky Denmark wrote: My point was that sometimes those well thought changes can come from pilots and trial and error, nothing on SiSi is set in stone but we need to start testing different ideas! Feedback on the current BC's has been Fed! I have tried getting a few peeps together to test these ships, but ,as you may know, sisi public is as bad as npc chat and everytime a group got together we were fending off T3s and capitals.....poorly lol. Well, I have nothing to do today, so if the devs want to send out a mass evemail to the community asking for tier 3 BC testers, I would volunteer a few hours so they can see the phail called Talos.
Willl Adama Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 36	Posted - 2011.11.09 13:37:00 - [352] - Quote Kiev Duran wrote: You show me a pilot that flies a Moa, and I'll show you one that has no grasp of EVE combat. CHECK THIS OUT!!! Latest Video:-á-á Kill Will: Volume 4
Rico Rage 0	Posted - 2011.11.09 13:56:00 - [353] - Quote So to recap CCP stance on this so far: - Minmatar are OP for lore reasons - Hybrids suck, but everything else is so screwed up we can't really fix em. - Naga sucks because Caldari BS's suck, and we can't possibly break away from the chain of suckage and fess up that Raven and Rokh were badly designed to begin with. Among many things, all this really seems to tell me is that CCP is too scared to change the status quo, and because the status quo is @$%^, things will continue to be as they are because they're afraid of trying to actually balance their game. sigh There goes my hope for this expansion.
Phantomania Alien Ship Builders Caedite Eos 6	Posted - 2011.11.09 13:59:00 - [354] - Quote Willl Adama wrote: Kiev Duran wrote: You show me a pilot that flies a Moa, and I'll show you one that has no grasp of EVE combat. CHECK THIS OUT!!! I agree, absolutely, positively no grasp or even the slightest clue of EvE combat.......at all!!!! Awesome Moa!!!
Pinky Denmark The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League 27	Posted - 2011.11.09 14:32:00 - [355] - Quote Even a Moa can surprise people - I see fun kills with people using logistics to heal-zero people :p That doesn't mean they have great offensive capabilities...
Vincent Gaines Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi 39	Posted - 2011.11.09 16:20:00 - [356] - Quote Willl Adama wrote: Kiev Duran wrote: You show me a pilot that flies a Moa, and I'll show you one that has no grasp of EVE combat. CHECK THIS OUT!!! Those are great engagements, using boosters, a tengu, and implants to gain a slight edge over people who are probably just in a typical fitted BC or HAC. Then again it's a T1 cruiser but compared to the effectiveness of a Rupture or even a Stabber.. nope.
Bomberlocks CTRL-Q 46	Posted - 2011.11.09 17:55:00 - [357] - Quote Ytterbium, Tallest: I think you should really, really watch this video of a Tornado killing everything from Battleships to T3 cruisers to interceptors to medium ecm drones. Something is very wrong here.
GlassLobster Pecuniam Nulla 0	Posted - 2011.11.09 19:55:00 - [358] - Quote I'm not sure if I did this right but here are some damage comparisons for the Oracle and Naga. All ships are using T2 weapons and no other modules. Short Range: http://i.imgur.com/Std52.png All ammunition is the close range T2 variant except for Torpedoes which are T1. The target is an Abaddon using Quad LiF. The Oracle had the same or better DPS in almost all situations except for Neutrons vs Dual Heavy Pulse. The Oracle also out ranged the DPS of the Naga in all systems except for Torpedoes. Torpedoes were the lowest of all dps. Torpedo DPS was slightly better (~500) against a stationary target. Long Range: http://i.imgur.com/2avTt.png 425mm Railgun vs. Tachyon Beam Laser. Both are using T2 longest range ammunition. I don't have any experience with these but I thought I'd ad them for comparison. The Oracle significantly out damages the Naga but suffers from reduced range. (The benefit of this range seems useless to me since you can just be probed or have your target warp off). Disclaimer: I don't know how to adjust for tracking.
Phantomania Alien Ship Builders Caedite Eos 6	Posted - 2011.11.09 21:12:00 - [359] - Quote Idea! ROLE- Heavy Destroyer- Tier3 Battlecruiser- Crazy DPS and Glass Tank First decide whether the role of this ship should be long range or short range, whichever will go for all 4 races as all races have a long and short range weapon alternative.- >Long Range gets Uber bonus/s for Weapon Range, thats it! (let them shoot from +/- 150km) >Short Range gets Uber bonus/s for Ship Speed, thats it! (let them go +/- 1500m/s) Heavy Destroyers should NOT be able to effectively hit anything smaller than a standard BC or be able to Solo PvP and must all be penalized to reflect this. They can easily be destroyed by small ships. I'd go as far as saying that they should have standard BC signiture but Cruiser size Tank. H/M/L Armor Tank Race Layout- 8/2/6 Shield Tank Race Layout- 8/6/2 Ship Attributes should reflect race weapons, ie: Extra cap for cap munching weapons or extra m/3 for cargohold for those weapons that use bulky ammo! The fact is that most pilots won't have a use for these ships, its a shame but then Ships would all have to have an 8/6/6 layout and put alot of other ships out of commision. Please don't try to compare these to any other ships, they have a role and are not standard! Thats the only answer I can see without making them just another regular PvP ship, we have enough of them already! Thx
Kiev Duran Grand Solar Trinity 12	Posted - 2011.11.09 22:16:00 - [360] - Quote Willl Adama wrote: Kiev Duran wrote: You show me a pilot that flies a Moa, and I'll show you one that has no grasp of EVE combat. CHECK THIS OUT!!! I don't believe I've ever seen anyone push a ship's tank that hard before, and I tip my hat to you good sir. Now, imagine what could have been done in a good combat ship. Or how most of those fights would have gone if the opposition brought neuts. Not to diminish the kills you got, but active tanking has a few serious drawbacks that I didn't see any of the guys you were fighting attempt to exploit.

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.