EVE Search - Sticky:[Carnyx] Sentry Drone Adjustments

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Carnyx] Sentry Drone Adjustments

» 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 .. 24 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Zafrena Tyrleon Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 4	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:27:45 - [61] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone! For our Carnyx release at the beginning of June we're planning on making some moderate tweaks to sentry drones, part of our ongoing process of massaging drone combat into a healthier place in the meta. These are a very specific and limited set of changes that we believe will benefit the game, but it's important to know that these are explicitly not intended to be a "once and for all" fix for every problem related to sentries. There's no such thing as a balance silver bullet. The main goals of these changes are to further improve the intra-class balance between sentry drones (smoothing out the progression in tracking speed and compressing the damage spread a bit) and slightly reducing the power level of some sentry fits and doctrines, especially for Bouncers and Curators that are quite dominant in a few areas. Current plan is: Gardes: -25% Optimal, +33% Falloff, -3% Damage, -6.67% Tracking Curators: -3.1% Damage, -13% Tracking Bouncers: -3.3% Damage, -12.5% Tracking We welcome feedback as always! You're directing the nerfs to the wrong place. Re-adjust drone bandwidth across the board. Change Heavy Drones to 20 (and Geckos to 40), leave sentries alone and then juggle bandwidth on the hulls. More work? Absolutely. But it's not a bandaid, it's a proper fix. If the Ishtar (and whatever other cruisers) can field only 4 Sentries, it's not quite BS-level damage anymore. What you're doing here is just moving the goalposts every 6 weeks to the point where people are frustrated with the situation. You guys are doing huge, sweeping changes to sov - why not consider doing it to drones?
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 678	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:30:34 - [62] - Quote Max Kolonko wrote: Altrue wrote: I'm on board with the idea of sentry ships being too strong. I'm not on board with the concept of nerfing the weapon system instead of the broken hulls. While you remove 3% dps, drone boats still run around with double 10/7.5 bonuses, drone boats still run around with the same PWG / CPU levels than other ships of their class, even though they don't have to fit weapons (!), ishtars can still use battleship weapons... So yeah... its too little, too far away from the real issue. But at least the conclusion that something needs to change with sentries is good. The problem us that drone ships of medium size (hacs, commands) can field bs size drones. If you renove those ships from equation you end up with either: slow cats and sentry domnis/other bs. Thise are waaay slower making them easier to counter and easier to balance in this regard. Even unbonused Wardens on the Ishtar would still be broken w/ base 75km + 42km range. Agreed. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Tyr Dolorem Snuff Box Snuffed Out 56	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:30:56 - [63] - Quote Max Kolonko wrote: Altrue wrote: I'm on board with the idea of sentry ships being too strong. I'm not on board with the concept of nerfing the weapon system instead of the broken hulls. While you remove 3% dps, drone boats still run around with double 10/7.5 bonuses, drone boats still run around with the same PWG / CPU levels than other ships of their class, even though they don't have to fit weapons (!), ishtars can still use battleship weapons... So yeah... its too little, too far away from the real issue. But at least the conclusion that something needs to change with sentries is good. The problem us that drone ships of medium size (hacs, commands) can field bs size drones. If you renove those ships from equation you end up with either: slow cats and sentry domnis/other bs. Thise are waaay slower making them easier to counter and easier to balance in this regard. If the problem was cruisers fielding BS size drones wouldn't people be crying about how broken a heavy drone VNI is? It's not the sentries that are the problem (at least on subs) its the bonuses that are applied to them from the hull.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 269	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:31:05 - [64] - Quote Can the Domi have access to fighters now, to balance the fact that Ishtars get access to heavy drones and sentries?
Onslaughtor Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems 141	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:32:42 - [65] - Quote The 3-4% damage drop feels reasonable, the tracking I can't really argue with. The swap from optimal to falloff on the Garde feels a bit off but the extra falloff range could be useful. Overall semi skeptical but nothing that out of place. Personally I despise sentries. But only on a ship that is not meant to fit them. On the Rattlesnake, Domi, and Armageddon I feel that they fit perfectly. One thing that I have thought of to fix this is to add one or 2 bandwidth or m3 to sentries. Then replicate that addition on battleships only. This instantly limits the number of sentries none battleships can field while letting them stay on undersides hulls.
Desudes Adversity. Northern Coalition. 433	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:33:04 - [66] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Desudes wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Tyr Dolorem wrote: Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both. How about you nerf the fundamental problem of disjointed transversal and the ability to command an entity from 120km that can itself reach beyond even that on a hull size that is usually restricted to 30-70km engagements, rather than introducing nerfs that hurt non-abusive doctrines and are countered by the abusive doctrine by simply bringing more dudes? The solution is far simpler - remove the Optimal range part of the double bonus on the Ishtar. Let them choose either Range+Tank, or Damage - not all three at once. Quote: In other words: If you keep nerfing only the projection and damage of sentries, people will bring MORE of them, and it will become (even more) a doctrine that is useless to small groups and overpowered for large groups, because raw stats aren't the issue with the ishtar. That will be the case until the fundamental problem of those double bonuses is resolves. Long live the Wardens! You're missing the point. Even if you reduce them to wardens, you stil allow for the ability to apply dps at range while maintaining full transversal. Reducing dps increases the amount of ishtars needed to reach critical mass, but it doesn't change the ship is holding etreme transversal with no negative effect to its own tracking, similar to missiles, but with missiles there is travel time and firewalls. Reducing the raw stats will lower the amount of corps/alliances able to field enough ishtars to be effective, but it will remain overpowered to those that can field the numbers. This is why the previous nerfs have done nothing but make fewer entities able to use the ship, but it hasn't changed anything to those throwing 250 ishtars at you. In other words, its still overpowered in the situations its overpowered, but its weaker where it isn't. Kind of a bland way to balance things, imo. I'd rather see the ship reworked entirely than relegated to a similar function the rail Naga sees. Excuse me, but what the fck are you desu?*
Borascus 626	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:33:48 - [67] - Quote It's not going to be problematic in the asymptote range of use. New Ishtar pilots will face more risk in level 4's. Raging null-sec fleets will lose a small amount of their net dps, less than 3%. People working out of Mobile Depots will be unaffected. The Deimos has 5 turret hardpoints with a 50% dmg bonus at level 5 cruiser + level 5 HAC, with space for 2 sentry, 1 Gecko or 5 medium. It does have an Armor Repair bonus though. Realistically, this change to sentry stats is only going to bolster the ammunition market, and decrease inflation. Forcing a slightly different approach from the 'risk free' application of damage found in huge fleets built around drones. Jammed ship guns vs Jammed ship still using drones will still be a sore spot.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 678	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:34:56 - [68] - Quote Zafrena Tyrleon wrote: You're directing the nerfs to the wrong place. Re-adjust drone bandwidth across the board. Change Heavy Drones to 20 (and Geckos to 40), leave sentries alone and then juggle bandwidth on the hulls. More work? Absolutely. But it's not a bandaid, it's a proper fix. If the Ishtar (and whatever other cruisers) can field only 4 Sentries, it's not quite BS-level damage anymore. That would still be a N+1 problem - just bring 1 more Ishtar for every 5 other you field to match old DPS. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Seven Koskanaiken Positive Failure Black Legion. 1508	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:35:04 - [69] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Desudes wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Tyr Dolorem wrote: Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both. How about you nerf the fundamental problem of disjointed transversal and the ability to command an entity from 120km that can itself reach beyond even that on a hull size that is usually restricted to 30-70km engagements, rather than introducing nerfs that hurt non-abusive doctrines and are countered by the abusive doctrine by simply bringing more dudes? The solution is far simpler - remove the Optimal range part of the double bonus on the Ishtar. Let them choose either Range+Tank, or Damage - not all three at once, exceeding all the other HACs by a broken amount, even the Eagle. This. Shield isn't even the prescribed tank for the Ishtar in the first place, let alone allowing them to have it with no trade offs, ccp pls.
Valterra Craven 542	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:35:12 - [70] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Tyr Dolorem wrote: Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both. I'm curious, what evidence do you have to support your argument that both drones and hulls are the problem, as opposed to just drones, or just hulls. I've seen no data analysis posted by devs in this thread as to why they think sentries themselves are still the problem. Or are you guys just basing balancing decisions on gut feelings now? :P http://i.imgur.com/GqTO6zd.png http://i.imgur.com/cP7kPvH.png Working as intended. Feel free to provide me a Zealot setup that would match that at least within 10%. Bonuses being the obvious part, as has been said, you can't balance sentry carriers without looking at the weapon system as a whole. P.S. Don't say, Shoot into their EM hole! Rectified by replacing one hardener. Shouldn't you be comparing them to their respective races? Aka bouncers to arties?

Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 678	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:36:55 - [71] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Tyr Dolorem wrote: Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both. I'm curious, what evidence do you have to support your argument that both drones and hulls are the problem, as opposed to just drones, or just hulls. I've seen no data analysis posted by devs in this thread as to why they think sentries themselves are still the problem. Or are you guys just basing balancing decisions on gut feelings now? :P http://i.imgur.com/GqTO6zd.png http://i.imgur.com/cP7kPvH.png Working as intended. Feel free to provide me a Zealot setup that would match that at least within 10%. Bonuses being the obvious part, as has been said, you can't balance sentry carriers without looking at the weapon system as a whole. P.S. Don't say, Shoot into their EM hole! Rectified by replacing one hardener. Shouldn't you be comparing them to their respective races? Aka bouncers to arties? Why? Ishtar is bonused in all sentries and all other racial drones. Nice try. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Jaime Gomes SniggWaffe WAFFLES. 12	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:38:11 - [72] - Quote The biggest complain i have regarding sentries is that its a defense system witch drawbacks normally are pretty much looked aside. What about this: make drones use CPU and PG like any other Offensive system in the game? I have to squeeze and maximize multiple skills so that many ships can be fitted "properly" without having to resort to buy implants/hardwires in order to function. With drones i believe that is not the case. What about this idea?
Urandas Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 1	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:40:01 - [73] - Quote Has their ever been plans to move Ishtars to having more powerful medium drones? Medium drone meta seems to have a better balance of having the damage from the drones more of either a secondary damage source or the ships that use medium drones such as pilgrams, curse, etc have a more ewar purpose. Unfortunately an Ishtar with medium drones wouldnt get the best damage. so maybe I just stated the reason why ishtars cant be shifted towards medium drones. meh, its an idea
Valterra Craven 542	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:41:02 - [74] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Why? Ishtar is bonused in all sentries and all other racial drones. Nice try. Then why is the zealot any more of a valid comparison?
SilentAsTheGrave Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 268	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:41:11 - [75] - Quote Obidiah Kane wrote: I learn the Ishtar then... I learn the Loki then... I learn the Svipul then... I learn the Domi then... you are nerfing a lot of ships that new players set as desire targets...is there anyway you could advise us of your rebalance timetable in advance? ie. if you had told me end of last year the Ishtar and Domi I had been training toward (with my PVE toon) were going to have their balls cut off I would have gone Amarr/ Caldari like everyone else, and not wasted months of sub training 'meh' skills I thought were 'Wooo!' skills. :( Sorry, just grumpy, everything seems to devalue after I have learnt it. Please train for the Falcon. Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
Tyr Dolorem Snuff Box Snuffed Out 58	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:41:50 - [76] - Quote Urandas wrote: Has their ever been plans to move Ishtars to having more powerful medium drones? Medium drone meta seems to have a better balance of having the damage from the drones more of either a secondary damage source or the ships that use medium drones such as pilgrams, curse, etc have a more ewar purpose. Unfortunately an Ishtar with medium drones wouldnt get the best damage. so maybe I just stated the reason why ishtars cant be shifted towards medium drones. meh, its an idea It's called a gila.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 678	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:41:55 - [77] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Why? Ishtar is bonused in all sentries and all other racial drones. Nice try. Then why is the zealot any more of a valid comparison? You're serious aren't you? Both the Zealot and the Ishtar are Heavy Assault Cruisers. People don't even remember, or know what ships like the Zealot, Muninn are. Good job, CCP. Tyr Dolorem wrote: Urandas wrote: Has their ever been plans to move Ishtars to having more powerful medium drones? Medium drone meta seems to have a better balance of having the damage from the drones more of either a secondary damage source or the ships that use medium drones such as pilgrams, curse, etc have a more ewar purpose. Unfortunately an Ishtar with medium drones wouldnt get the best damage. so maybe I just stated the reason why ishtars cant be shifted towards medium drones. meh, its an idea It's called a gila. Even better than the Ishtar in this department w/ 850 DPS, 82k EHP and faster too. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Azure and Argent Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation 1	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:48:53 - [78] - Quote Xavier Azabu wrote: Will this finally discourage people from using the Ishtar? Nope. They still have great tank, great mobility, and best in class DPS.
Amanda MonteCarlo Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:49:16 - [79] - Quote Couple of fun facts about drones - current stats compared to other weapon systems - no skill bonuses applied. Tracking: bouncer - 0.019 1400's - 0.009 curator - 0.028 tachyon beam - 0.014 warden - 0.012 425 rail - 0.01 Yup 2x the tracking than large guns (except wardens) - maybe more tracking nerfs are required? Damage: 0 lvl skills, faction medium range ammo(you need it to have similiar range as drones). bouncer - 24dps - 36+54km range 1400's with titanium sabot - 13dps - 48+35km range Tachyon with standard - 16dps - 53+20km range Curator - 26dps - 42+12km range 425 rail with lead- 14dps - 58+24km range Warden - 22dps - 60+42km range Eve if you count hat domi has 7.5 effective drones vs 8-10 effective turrets of battleships the damage at range is way better for drones boats. Maybe DPS should be decreased a bit more. Also projectiles suck, AC's need more range - barrage would be ok-ish if it had +100% fallof and selectable damage, and arty can't fit on anything.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 678	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:50:45 - [80] - Quote Thanks, Amanda MonteCarlo. People knew, CCP knew. ProgressGäó is being made. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]

Valterra Craven 542	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:51:15 - [81] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Why? Ishtar is bonused in all sentries and all other racial drones. Nice try. Then why is the zealot any more of a valid comparison? You're serious aren't you? Both the Zealot and the Ishtar are Heavy Assault Cruisers. People don't even remember, or know what ships like the Zealot, Muninn are. Good job, CCP. Serious about my first question: "I'm curious, what evidence do you have to support your argument that both drones and hulls are the problem, as opposed to just drones, or just hulls. I've seen no data analysis posted by devs in this thread as to why they think sentries themselves are still the problem." We all know that the ishtar having access to sentries is stupid beyond belief (and by we I mean everyone but CCP) No one would think twice about the ranges of sentries if they were bs only and above weapons. Hell in that regard they are even underpowered compared to them considering some of the extreme ranges you can hit with rails and artys! Yet, they keep nerfing sentries into the ground to try and fix this issue with the ishtar. So my question is, what the hell are they looking at that they think sentries are still the problem? As to your post, I'm not sure what point you were trying to prove as I already agree that the ishtar is stupid OP right now.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 678	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:52:38 - [82] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Why? Ishtar is bonused in all sentries and all other racial drones. Nice try. Quote: Then why is the zealot any more of a valid comparison? You're serious aren't you? Both the Zealot and the Ishtar are Heavy Assault Cruisers. People don't even remember, or know what ships like the Zealot, Muninn are. Good job, CCP. Serious about my first question: "I'm curious, what evidence do you have to support your argument that both drones and hulls are the problem, as opposed to just drones, or just hulls. I've seen no data analysis posted by devs in this thread as to why they think sentries themselves are still the problem." We all know that the ishtar having access to sentries is stupid beyond belief (and by we I mean everyone but CCP) Yet, they keep nerfing sentries into the ground to try and fix this issue. So my question is, what the hell are they looking at that they think sentries are still the problem? As your post, I'm not sure what point you were trying to prove as I already agree that the ishtar is stupid OP right now. Into the ground. Right. Look up the two posts above yours. Into the ground - http://evenews24.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/zbg9Bbn-1024x702.png Further into the ground - http://i.imgur.com/XJIWFZY.gif * *Courtesy of Solidarius - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5616268#post5616268 // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Valterra Craven 542	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:56:21 - [83] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Into the ground. Right. Look up the two posts above yours. Quick question. How many sentys can you deploy on a domi. Quick question. How many artys can you fit on a mael?
Desudes Adversity. Northern Coalition. 433	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:56:44 - [84] - Quote I lost the quote because :eve forums: but to the guy comparing ishtars to zealots: The problem with your comparison is sentry drones cannot move. Tactics dictate whether this is an advantage or disadvantage, though it should be noted that close range sentries see little use for a reason, as people can move away from them easily. This also doesnt take into consideration that, for example, a linked beam legion is 80-85m sig radius. For example a beam zealot with IN standard (57+16, 0.037 tracking) doing 371dps (2/3 EM 1/3 therm dmg) into your ishtar fits 54% em resist and 82% therm resist, and 732 sig radius moving at 1578m/s Whereas the ishtar doing 457 explosive dps (62+76 range, 0.028 tracking) against 90% explosive resist, 84m sig radius, moving at 660m/s Two entirely different ships. The fight cannot be determined by stats, as far too much piloting is involved in the fight. Excuse me, but what the fck are you desu?*
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 269	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:56:54 - [85] - Quote Just reduce ishtar bandwidth to 100 already. Why this hasn't been done yet is a mystery.
Ryan en Tilavine Yulai Guard Yulai Federation 0	Posted - 2015.05.21 15:58:19 - [86] - Quote Ive always trusted you fozzie to not need a helping hand. But here i am. Making my first ever post, since you can't seem to see the forest for the trees. Sentry drones are FINE. Leave them as they are now and just do this... The Ishtar we all want to see Gallente cruiser bonus : 7.5% to light, medium, heavy drone max velocity and tracking speed 10% to drone damage and hitpoints Heavy Assault Cruiser bonus : 5000m bonus to drone operation range 7.5% to sentry drone tracking 375 M3 drone bay 125 mb drone bandwidth The Dominix we all want to see Gellente Battleship bonus 7.5% to drone max velocity and optimal range 10% bonus to drone damage and hitpoints 375 m3 drone bay 125 mb drone bandwidth The sentry drones out of any other ship are fine. Their ranges, tracking, damage, hitpoints, and immobility feel perfect as they are now. Nerfing them will only pound other ships that would use them into the dust. If you want to take 10-15% of the optimal from gardes and give them the same falloff then cool. But leave them be besides.
Azure and Argent Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation 1	Posted - 2015.05.21 16:00:30 - [87] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Tyr Dolorem wrote: Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both. Because nerfing the Thorax really helped with that Tengu problem.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 269	Posted - 2015.05.21 16:04:03 - [88] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Zafrena Tyrleon wrote: You're directing the nerfs to the wrong place. Re-adjust drone bandwidth across the board. Change Heavy Drones to 20 (and Geckos to 40), leave sentries alone and then juggle bandwidth on the hulls. More work? Absolutely. But it's not a bandaid, it's a proper fix. If the Ishtar (and whatever other cruisers) can field only 4 Sentries, it's not quite BS-level damage anymore. That would still be a N+1 problem - just bring 1 more Ishtar for every 5 other you field to match old DPS. Wrong. It would encourage people to start using other ships again as the ishtar would stop being completely oppressive within its weight class.
Judas Lonestar Stryker Industries Low-Class 125	Posted - 2015.05.21 16:06:12 - [89] - Quote So a drone type (sentries) which arent all that impressive outside of bonused hulls now become even worse? Fantastic idea. I cant believe it wasnt thought of sooner.....
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 678	Posted - 2015.05.21 16:06:22 - [90] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Into the ground. Right. Look up the two posts above yours. Quick question. How many sentys can you deploy on a domi? Quick question. How many artys can you fit on a mael? How quickly you change the topic from the Ishtar. Don't try demagogy, it won't work. Maelstrom has 8 * (1 / (1-0.25)) = 10.6 Effective turrets. Dominix has 5 * 1.5 = 7.5 Effective sentries. Each sentry deals more damage than each turret. A Dominix with 3 DDAs can do 579 DPS at 103 + 42km ranges with Wardens. For Maelstrom with 3x Gyros and 1400s to reach that range, you have to use Tremor, giving you 395 DPS at 108 + 44 km. With Bouncers Domi does 620 DPS at 61 + 54km - Maelstrom can't reach those levels at all at this damage level. Try again. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: 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.