EVE Search - Cut the Crap - Freighter Ganking

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Cut the Crap - Freighter Ganking

» 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 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.18 11:40:00 - [61] Originally by: TrulyKosh Let's assume for a minute that they were not. Let's assume that there was a similar restriction to using freighters as there is to certain skills and trial accounts. i.e. no freighters in NPC corps. If that was in place, there would be 100+ new 1-man corps, i guess, so that would not be a solution as i can already hear the complaints "but i cannot war dec 100 corps!" As i said before, i have no problem with freigters being vulnerable. But random ganks are not an element I would miss if they were taken out of the game. The war dec is a legitimate tool to kill everyone and his dog in high sec. The fact that NPC corps cannot be war decced is sad, but i rather have that than random ganks. I am placing some hope on faction warfare in this regard. (Idea: if you have high standings with a caldari NPC corp, would it not be nice to be able to obtain a letter of marque against a gallente NPC corp?) Yes on all accounts. That's a real problem, and that's why we need to disallow freighters from high sec. /Ki Remember, kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
fire 59 Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.05.18 11:41:00 - [62] Would maybe invalidating the insurance for suiciding in empire be a step in the right direction? Also self destruction because that also doesn't make sense if you think about it. BoB vs the coalition of family values
TrulyKosh Solo for UNCLE Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.18 11:54:00 - [63] Originally by: fire 59 Would maybe invalidating the insurance for suiciding in empire be a step in the right direction? Also self destruction because that also doesn't make sense if you think about it. This has been mentioned quite often, but all it would change is to raise the value of the cargo a freighter has to carry for ganking it to be still profitable. Ganking would still occur. A temporal solution IHMO would be to increase the sec status penalty for high sec ganking and to extend the penalty for ship killing to all in gang at the time, not just the "unlucky" guy who got the final blow. But gankers do not even have to be in gangs and i don't think ccp staff would appreciate searching hundreds of logs searching for all people that were involved :) Plus, the "remedy" to cure your bad sec. standing is ridiculous. Grinding BS kills for hours for the offender does absolutely nothing for the freighter pilot. If it was a penalty, should not the victim get something from it? I only invest in businesses that even a fool can run. Because some day a fool will. (Warren Buffett)
Tarron Sarek Gallente Cadien Cybernetics	Posted - 2007.05.18 11:54:00 - [64] Originally by: Jim McGregor PvP is becoming more and more consensual with the recent changes to war decs and concord buffs. I dont like it. That's probably because people are exploting and pushing the limits left and right. Too many participate in the old new bored senior players initiative: Need for grief. _________________________________ - People are people wherever you go -
Vana Gank Gallente Kebabtossers	Posted - 2007.05.18 11:56:00 - [65] Edited by: Vana Gank on 18/05/2007 11:54:20 Originally by: Ki An Originally by: TrulyKosh Let's assume for a minute that they were not. Let's assume that there was a similar restriction to using freighters as there is to certain skills and trial accounts. i.e. no freighters in NPC corps. If that was in place, there would be 100+ new 1-man corps, i guess, so that would not be a solution as i can already hear the complaints "but i cannot war dec 100 corps!" As i said before, i have no problem with freigters being vulnerable. But random ganks are not an element I would miss if they were taken out of the game. The war dec is a legitimate tool to kill everyone and his dog in high sec. The fact that NPC corps cannot be war decced is sad, but i rather have that than random ganks. I am placing some hope on faction warfare in this regard. (Idea: if you have high standings with a caldari NPC corp, would it not be nice to be able to obtain a letter of marque against a gallente NPC corp?) Yes on all accounts. That's a real problem, and that's why we need to disallow freighters from high sec. /Ki Yes, for arguments sake ban all expensive and vulerable ships from Hi_Sec. No more Indy's with Zyd. Drop the zyd, and you'll be allowed to fly there. Again - can you tell my WHY one shouldnt fix the problem (CONCORDE) instead of coming up with all other sort of funny (but also flamebaits) for soltuins? I guess not ... -------------------------- Please adjust the map, please. Im not clever enough to figure out which way to fly.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Requiem of Hades	Posted - 2007.05.18 11:56:00 - [66] Originally by: Tarron Sarek Originally by: Jim McGregor PvP is becoming more and more consensual with the recent changes to war decs and concord buffs. I dont like it. That's probably because people are exploting and pushing the limits left and right. Too many participate in the old new bored senior players initiative: Need for grief. QFT. Too many griefers in-game to be honest. Too many lions and too few sheeps are no good for sheep farmers. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.18 11:58:00 - [67] Originally by: Vana Gank Yes, for arguments sake ban all expensive and vulerable ships from Hi_Sec. No more Indy's with Zyd. Drop the zyd, and you'll be allowed to fly there. Again - can you tell my WHY one shouldnt fix the problem (CONCORDE) instead of coming up with all other sort of funny (but also flamebaits) for soltuins? I guess not ... Like I said in the other thread: "Fixing the problem" like you say, would only mean creating another problem, that of freighter invulnerability. Thus, you have not really fixed a problem. You have just pushed it one step to the right. /Ki Remember, kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
Vana Gank Gallente Kebabtossers	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:03:00 - [68] Originally by: Ki An Like I said in the other thread: "Fixing the problem" like you say, would only mean creating another problem, that of freighter invulnerability. Thus, you have not really fixed a problem. You have just pushed it one step to the right. /Ki Fixing CONCORDE creates a possible problem? Invulnarebility? Where-the-hell? Yes, when you have 7623-gazzilion drones there, but hey - thats a major sploit trying to down a system by overloading. I think we can see that rule coming ... insta-ban of accounts for using sploits. Good luck to anyone who wish to try it. I'm afraid of CCP trying to nerf Gallente (in reality drone-ships). However - a possible sploit is the only problem listed so far - and it's open today as it will be in the future. -------------------------- Please adjust the map, please. Im not clever enough to figure out which way to fly.
R3dSh1ft FIRMA	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:06:00 - [69] Good post OP, I agree with the changes you suggest. Freighters are a little off-skew right now for various reasons, at least giving them one mid and one low slot would allow them to defend themselves, but no offense - seems fair to me. Also, why shouldn't freighter's be able to put on cargo expander rigs if they want to? I think originally the freighter's cargo bays were nerfed to below 1 million m3 so they couldnt carry ASSEMBLED battleships (making it possibly to move an insured ship). But thanks to some nice coding changes by the team, its not possible to put any kind of assembled ship into a freighter now. Surely the time for freighters without slots has come to an end, CCP? _________________________________________________________ FIRMA - a drinking corp with an EVE problem
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:12:00 - [70] Originally by: Vana Gank confused I don't think you understand what I mean. Yes, concord should fire at drones. I agree with you. It's already there on SiSi. But don't you see the problem with this too? Until now, the only, and I mean ONLY way to suicide a freighter was using lots of domis with drones. Now that option is taken away, probably with good cause. But now another problem arises. How the hell are we supposed to take down freighters in high sec now? It's practically (note, not theoretcially, but practically much like it's practically impossible to defend a freighter from a suicide gank) impossible to take one down. That means freighters would be practically invulnerable. That's a MAJOR balance issue. So, you ask, why can't you just wardec the freighter pilot? Answer: Because most are in NPC corps. But, you ask, why do you need to kill freighters anyway? Answer: If you need to ask that question you need to think a bit more about what this game is supposed to be about. Freighters need to be killable because you need to be able to control the market by force of arms. You need to be able to disrupt your enemy's logistical effort, and yes, a lot of that run through empire and only there. Do you understand me now? /Ki Remember, kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!

Tarron Sarek Gallente Cadien Cybernetics	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:14:00 - [71] Originally by: TrulyKosh Originally by: fire 59 (invalidating the insurance for suiciding in empire/ Also (for) self destruction) This has been mentioned quite often, but all it would change is to raise the value of the cargo a freighter has to carry for ganking it to be still profitable. Ganking would still occur. Isn't that what we're aiming for? - Raise the bar so not every freighter is a valid and profitable target. - Raise the bar so that the attackers lose more in the attempt. Ganking could still occur, but it would be far less common. Yet of course, if at all, it should be possible with other ships than drones boats, too. _________________________________ - People are people wherever you go -
Vana Gank Gallente Kebabtossers	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:15:00 - [72] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Vana Gank confused I don't think you understand what I mean. .. stuff ... Do you understand me now? /Ki Good point, now I see what you were trying to address. But I honestly doesnt see the problem by spending 2 billion in battleships (insured) to persue a target that: - Worth 1 billion in caost (hurt your enemy) - May carry 1 bill in goods or more. It's just a matter of selecting the correct targets - You wanna hurt your mortal enemy, take the cost of insured battleships - or be a man, use wars - You want to grab goods, well be sure to pick the freighters who's carrying enough goods - You wanna grief for griefing sake? sorry, you need to take out the Indy's for that -------------------------- Please adjust the map, please. Im not clever enough to figure out which way to fly.
R3dSh1ft FIRMA	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:18:00 - [73] Originally by: Ki An Answer: Because most are in NPC corps. /Ki Absolutely mate, the use of NPC corporations as a Safe Haven needs to be looked at. As something of a deterrent, add a 20% income tax to NPC corp members (not noob corps, npc corps so the new players don't get unfairly penalised). Or perhaps limit them to one region to play in hehe. _________________________________________________________ FIRMA - a drinking corp with an EVE problem
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:21:00 - [74] Originally by: Ki An Wouldn't it be nice if all freighters where in corps which could be decced then? Even if I normally am contrary to any nerfing of the players in NPC corporations, the whole issue on freighter gankin make me think that restricting the use of freighters to members of players corp can be the best solution, if at the same time freighers are given a decent slot set up to permit them to defend themselves. That will change little for the suicide gank seeking any target of opportunity, while someone wanting to kill the industrial transport of an opposed corp/alliance has the possibility to war dec them.
Vana Gank Gallente Kebabtossers	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:21:00 - [75] Edited by: Vana Gank on 18/05/2007 12:19:00 Originally by: R3dSh1ft Originally by: Ki An Answer: Because most are in NPC corps. /Ki Absolutely mate, the use of NPC corporations as a Safe Haven needs to be looked at. As something of a deterrent, add a 20% income tax to NPC corp members (not noob corps, npc corps so the new players don't get unfairly penalised). Or perhaps limit them to one region to play in hehe. NPC corps - also a good point. But you can still gank them if they are carrying valubles. And banning Hi-Sec frighters will help in what way? Cost vs Gain. -------------------------- Please adjust the map, please. Im not clever enough to figure out which way to fly.
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:21:00 - [76] Originally by: Vana Gank Good point, now I see what you were trying to address. But I honestly doesnt see the problem by spending 2 billion in battleships (insured) to persue a target that: - Worth 1 billion in caost (hurt your enemy) - May carry 1 bill in goods or more. Ok, I think you're getting closer, but you're still missing the major point. The changes on SiSi (Concord targetting and destroying drones) will NOT raise the bar of how many ships are needed to take down a freighter. It will make taking down a freighter practically impossible. That's too big a step, and it WILL have major consequences. Originally by: Vana Gank It's just a matter of selecting the correct targets - You wanna hurt your mortal enemy, take the cost of insured battleships - or be a man, use wars - You want to grab goods, well be sure to pick the freighters who's carrying enough goods - You wanna grief for griefing sake? sorry, you need to take out the Indy's for that No, it's not a matter of selecting the correct target. You CANNOT practically take down a freighter with the changes that are on SiSi. Just as impractical as defensive measures (that are also already in the game) are to freighter pilots, taking down a freighter after the SiSi changes take effect will be for pirates and enemies alike. Originally by: Vana Gank EDIT: I can't see the imbalance. Where? I hope you can now. /Ki Remember, kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
Vana Gank Gallente Kebabtossers	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:23:00 - [77] Edited by: Vana Gank on 18/05/2007 12:21:39 I see some of your points - but have you tested what is practical so far? 30 Battelships? 100 Battlehips? I mean, we need to end up there before we can say whats impractical (or imbalanced for that sake). But then again, you might have tested this already. -------------------------- Please adjust the map, please. Im not clever enough to figure out which way to fly.
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:28:00 - [78] Edited by: Ki An on 18/05/2007 12:27:06 Originally by: Vana Gank Edited by: Vana Gank on 18/05/2007 12:21:39 I see some of your points - but have you tested what is practical so far? 30 Battelships? 100 Battlehips? I mean, we need to end up there before we can say whats impractical (or imbalanced for that sake). But then again, you might have tested this already. I have tested it. In .5 Concord arrives in 15 seconds. You need to dish out a hell of a lot of damage in that time. I made a test with 15 hyperions with maxed out skills and faction mods, an investment of more than a couple of billions, and they might be able to take the freighter down. But it's interesting that you bring up the point of what is practical or not. After all, we've been told that it is impractical for the freighter to have even ONE scout, as that would cut into the profit margin. Let alone having a fleet of 6-7 remote repping BS, or 2-3 BS guarding the wreck. All of this was deemed impractical. Yet, to take down a freighter we are supposed to accept that it's practical to assemble a fleet of 15 tier 3 bs with the best mods available in the game, flown by players with maxed out skills, or barring that, a fleet of 50-60 battle ships with lesser mods flown by lesser skilled pilots in order to take down a freighter. /Ki Remember, kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
TrulyKosh Solo for UNCLE Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:38:00 - [79] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Vana Gank Good point, now I see what you were trying to address. But I honestly doesnt see the problem by spending 2 billion in battleships (insured) to persue a target that: - Worth 1 billion in caost (hurt your enemy) - May carry 1 bill in goods or more. Ok, I think you're getting closer, but you're still missing the major point. The changes on SiSi (Concord targetting and destroying drones) will NOT raise the bar of how many ships are needed to take down a freighter. It will make taking down a freighter practically impossible. That's too big a step, and it WILL have major consequences. Originally by: Vana Gank It's just a matter of selecting the correct targets - You wanna hurt your mortal enemy, take the cost of insured battleships - or be a man, use wars - You want to grab goods, well be sure to pick the freighters who's carrying enough goods - You wanna grief for griefing sake? sorry, you need to take out the Indy's for that No, it's not a matter of selecting the correct target. You CANNOT practically take down a freighter with the changes that are on SiSi. Just as impractical as defensive measures (that are also already in the game) are to freighter pilots, taking down a freighter after the SiSi changes take effect will be for pirates and enemies alike. Originally by: Vana Gank EDIT: I can't see the imbalance. Where? I hope you can now. /Ki Back to square 1 :) War dec the target and concord will not interfere. I only invest in businesses that even a fool can run. Because some day a fool will. (Warren Buffett)
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:41:00 - [80] Originally by: Jim McGregor That sounds awful to me. Maybe bring in 50 ships to bring a freighter down? Then the freighter cargo must have extreme value for it to be worth it. I dont know, it sounds very much like ccp are overdoing this. 50 ships? You sure? Awhile back people were doing the math on a freighter gank with Ravens and came up with something like 20 Ravens to do it. Really no worse than Domis today and I expect Ravens will become the ship of choice for freighter suicide ganks. Now if you buff CONCORD damage (are they being buffed like this as well or is it they just go after drones now?) you will need to recalculate the needed number of ships to be successful. That number will rise of course but how far I guess remains to be seen. The thing is it should rise. My personal opinion is if you allow something like a suicide gank to be profitable then the bar should be rather high to meet that profit margin. It is a balance issue. Just how cheaply should someone be able to suicide a ship? Where do you draw the line? Would a few frigs able to suicide a freighter be ok? (I am guessing most people would say no to that.) I think the "balance" ought to be that it requires more cash outlay for a suicide gank than the ship that is being ganked costs (no mods). This would go for everything from shuttles to Titans. If a freighter costs a billion ISK to suicide in Empire than the suiciders should have to throw at least 1 billion ISK at the task. PvPers often grouse about how their billion+ cap ships should be very hard to kill. Why not a freighter too? Part of the issue is freighters easily achieve billion+ cargoes hauling most anything more valuable than trit. When it costs 300 million to pop them today that is messed up. I am not talking about making freighters untouchable but allow freighter pilots to adjust their cargo a bit if they are approaching whatever the new gankable threshold is (seems around 2.5 billion or so). Last note: Freighters are NOT capital ships. They do require capital components to build true but they do not require the capital ship skill to fly and they can use jump gates.

Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:44:00 - [81] Originally by: TrulyKosh Back to square 1 :) War dec the target and concord will not interfere. You still not getting the fact that most freighters are in NPC corps? /Ki Remember, kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
Caffeine Junkie Caldari Elite Storm Enterprises Storm Armada	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:46:00 - [82] Originally by: Duff Man -To the Carebears - High sec should be much safer than low sec, but not completely safe. CCP have stated again and again that one of EvE's driving principles is Risk vs Reward. By that argument alone, if there was ZERO risk in High Sec, then there would also be ZERO reward. Which as we all know is not the case Ummm....yes! Ram your car into something on purpose and your insurace isn't going to pay out! Totally agree with suiciding macro-miners however. ___________________ Don't worry i'll put your loot to good use ;-)
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:46:00 - [83] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h 50 ships? You sure? Awhile back people were doing the math on a freighter gank with Ravens and came up with something like 20 Ravens to do it. Really no worse than Domis today and I expect Ravens will become the ship of choice for freighter suicide ganks. Do the math yourself and you will see. Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Last note: Freighters are NOT capital ships. They do require capital components to build true but they do not require the capital ship skill to fly and they can use jump gates. How come freighters are capital ships when it benefits the freighter pilots, but are not capital ships when it goes against them? Fact is, freighters require capital components. Fact is, freighters are described as capital ships. /Ki Remember, kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
TrulyKosh Solo for UNCLE Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:50:00 - [84] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: TrulyKosh Back to square 1 :) War dec the target and concord will not interfere. You still not getting the fact that most freighters are in NPC corps? /Ki And i tried to show you that it would not make a difference. If they were not in NPC corps, they'd be in 1-man corps and you cannot war dec them all (anymore). You'd have to pick your targets 1 by 1 and no more random ganking every freighter that comes through Jita. I only invest in businesses that even a fool can run. Because some day a fool will. (Warren Buffett)
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:52:00 - [85] Originally by: TrulyKosh And i tried to show you that it would not make a difference. If they were not in NPC corps, they'd be in 1-man corps and you cannot war dec them all (anymore). You'd have to pick your targets 1 by 1 and no more random ganking every freighter that comes through Jita. I am aware of this, and that's why I keep telling you that the ONLY way to get around this is to bar freighters from high sec. /Ki Remember, kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
Thesas Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2007.05.18 12:59:00 - [86] Originally by: Bistot Kid Here's my take on freighters and high sec. What do companies to to secure the route of cigarette trucks? High value goods in a single large truck. Do they ... ... inform the police of the route they are taking? ... have so much money they take a "hit" occasionally? ... run their own security escort? ... something else? I don't know the answer, but I reckon this is a case where we could use an RL example and come up with something sensible. Interesting hypothetical, In the case of a company I am aware of, moving high end electronics, there is a standard procedure. Taking a ôhitö is viewed as unacceptable. 1. Insure the cargo. 2. Insure the truck (freighter?) 3. Notify the security agency to retain escort. (1 unmarked vehicle with 2 armed guards typically) 4. 2 armed guards in truck. 1 in cab with driver and one in truck with cargo.. 5. Communicate checkpoints with home dispatch. The premise is to be discreet, yet well guarded. In the event of complications, the first action on the part of the security team is to notify home dispatch to call the local authorities for backup. The sequence would be: Call for backup, evade the problem, security runs interference until authorities arrive. It works in real world but the UK is hardly Empire. A freighter can not call Concord.
TrulyKosh Solo for UNCLE Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.18 13:02:00 - [87] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: TrulyKosh And i tried to show you that it would not make a difference. If they were not in NPC corps, they'd be in 1-man corps and you cannot war dec them all (anymore). You'd have to pick your targets 1 by 1 and no more random ganking every freighter that comes through Jita. I am aware of this, and that's why I keep telling you that the ONLY way to get around this is to bar freighters from high sec. /Ki I see nothing i'd have to "get around". The first suicide gank of a freighter was probably amusing for those involved as a proof of concept. But I don't see the need to maintain it as a full-time profession and source of income for some. I only invest in businesses that even a fool can run. Because some day a fool will. (Warren Buffett)
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.05.18 13:08:00 - [88] Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 18/05/2007 13:07:46 Originally by: Ki An Originally by: Imperator Jora'h 50 ships? You sure? Awhile back people were doing the math on a freighter gank with Ravens and came up with something like 20 Ravens to do it. Really no worse than Domis today and I expect Ravens will become the ship of choice for freighter suicide ganks. Do the math yourself and you will see. I can't since I have no clue if CONCORD has really been buffed in its damage output on SiSi and if so just how much. If they remain the same as they are today and just go after drones then the math has been done...~20 Ravens should manage. Quote: Last note: Freighters are NOT capital ships. They do require capital components to build true but they do not require the capital ship skill to fly and they can use jump gates. Quote: How come freighters are capital ships when it benefits the freighter pilots, but are not capital ships when it goes against them? Fact is, freighters require capital components. Fact is, freighters are described as capital ships. /Ki I cannot control what other players call them. - Freighters do NOT require the cap ship skill to fly (main point right there) - Freighters CAN use jump gates which cap ships cannot. Besides, just look around the real world. Take the Seawise Giant (formerly the Jahre Viking) Ultra Large Crude Carrier. At 1,504 feet long and over 260,000 tons it is a fair bit larger than the USS Ronald Reagan Aircraft Carrier which is 1,092 feet long and 104,000 tons. Despite that tanker's size have you ever heard of an oil tanker described as a "capital ship"?
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2007.05.18 13:11:00 - [89] Originally by: TrulyKosh I see nothing i'd have to "get around". The first suicide gank of a freighter was probably amusing for those involved as a proof of concept. But I don't see the need to maintain it as a full-time profession and source of income for some. Sigh, you keep missing the point... I am not arguing wether or not suiciding should be a lucrative profession in EvE. I am arguing that there need to be a way to take out freighters. Right now there is. After the changes on SiSi take effect, there won't be. Moving freighters out of high sec will make them into what they are supposed to be: Elite cargo transporters that are highly vulnerable and in need of constant protection. /Ki Remember, kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"!
TrulyKosh Solo for UNCLE Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.18 13:14:00 - [90] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Besides, just look around the real world. Take the Seawise Giant (formerly the Jahre Viking) Ultra Large Crude Carrier. At 1,504 feet long and over 260,000 tons it is a fair bit larger than the USS Ronald Reagan Aircraft Carrier which is 1,092 feet long and 104,000 tons. Despite that tanker's size have you ever heard of an oil tanker described as a "capital ship"? Try to compare the reactions when one of them approaches the Iranian coastline , i'm sure there is one. sorry, could not resist. I only invest in businesses that even a fool can run. Because some day a fool will. (Warren Buffett)



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 :: 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.