EVE Search - Sisi Bomb Testing Results and Reccomendations

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Sisi Bomb Testing Results and Reccomendations

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.10.11 02:01:00 - [1] AGONY spent several hours working on Sisi to test the bombs and their applicability in combat. What we found was the following: No more than 4 can be launched at any one time without them blowing each other up. The 5th causes other bombs to be destroyed. If you come from 2 different sides, you could put 8 bombs on target. Four (or even 8) bombs wont kill an assault frigate possibly because of the size of the radius of the ship. Bombs were doing only 109 damage per bomb to the AF. The only thing that can be killed with 4 bombs are: untanked cruisers untanked recon ship recon ships with MWD on and stationary cruisers with MWD on and stationary With 8 BOmbs the results are as with 4 bombs with the following additions: Lightly or Untanked tanked HACs Tanked Cruisers Battlecruisers, Battleships, and frigates (without a MWD on) and stationary can not be killed by bombs. The forward distace that the bomb flies before detonation is 1.25 km x 15 sec = resulting in a distance of 18.75 km from point of launch. Even a cloaked bomber flies between 300 and 500 m/s; at 15 seconds that is 4.5 to 7.5 km. With a bomb blast range of 15km and only a 3.75 km buffer for navigation, bombers will have a difficult time avoiding the blast point of their own bombs. The results of this test lead me to the following reccomendations: Resistance to a bomb's own damage type should be upped to 99.95% to allow the opponents to launch as many concurrent bombs as they can deploy with their resources. Because the resistance to other damage i 0, it should not affect their ability to be destroyed by smartbombs. Bomb velocity should be raised to 3km / second giving a travel distance of 45 km over the same time and making it easier for the bombers to evade. Light and fast ships should still be able to take them on.. The forward trajectory dumb launch is effective for lauching bombs and introduces a new paradigm of shooting. It would be better if the ship didnt auto-level in space however. Bomb cost should be Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Udyr Vulpayne Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.10.11 03:48:00 - [2] Originally by: Rells The forward distace that the bomb flies before detonation is 1.25 km x 15 sec = resulting in a distance of 18.75 km from point of launch. Even a cloaked bomber flies between 300 and 500 m/s; at 15 seconds that is 4.5 to 7.5 km. With a bomb blast range of 15km and only a 3.75 km buffer for navigation, bombers will have a difficult time avoiding the blast point of their own bombs. bombers also dont have to fly between 300 and 500m/s when they launch the bomb. slow down before you launch the bomb and you should be able to avoid getting into the blast radius. or alternatively...fit for some agility and turn around right away.
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.10.11 04:21:00 - [3] Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne Originally by: Rells The forward distace that the bomb flies before detonation is 1.25 km x 15 sec = resulting in a distance of 18.75 km from point of launch. Even a cloaked bomber flies between 300 and 500 m/s; at 15 seconds that is 4.5 to 7.5 km. With a bomb blast range of 15km and only a 3.75 km buffer for navigation, bombers will have a difficult time avoiding the blast point of their own bombs. bombers also dont have to fly between 300 and 500m/s when they launch the bomb. slow down before you launch the bomb and you should be able to avoid getting into the blast radius. or alternatively...fit for some agility and turn around right away. That is tough to do when you need to evade their fast ships as well. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.11 04:30:00 - [4] Originally by: Rells Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne Originally by: Rells The forward distace that the bomb flies before detonation is 1.25 km x 15 sec = resulting in a distance of 18.75 km from point of launch. Even a cloaked bomber flies between 300 and 500 m/s; at 15 seconds that is 4.5 to 7.5 km. With a bomb blast range of 15km and only a 3.75 km buffer for navigation, bombers will have a difficult time avoiding the blast point of their own bombs. bombers also dont have to fly between 300 and 500m/s when they launch the bomb. slow down before you launch the bomb and you should be able to avoid getting into the blast radius. or alternatively...fit for some agility and turn around right away. That is tough to do when you need to evade their fast ships as well. Run up cloaked, uncloak, drop the bomb, warp/move away. If you can do it while alligned its even better.
Udyr Vulpayne Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.10.11 04:35:00 - [5] Originally by: Rells That is tough to do... and that is bad how?
murder one Gallente Blood Corsair's	Posted - 2007.10.11 05:52:00 - [6] The current design of bombs is just ridiculous. And I'm referring to the 'new' updated changes on test, not the total steaming pile of crap on TQ. I'm assuming that the original intent of bombs was to coerce people into not 'blobbing', and flying in something other than one huge group. Obviously that hasn't happened. Reasons for this: bombs are too hard to use, they're too dangerous for the bombers themselves, and they're wholly ineffective at doing anything. Not just their jobs, but literally anything worthwhile wasting your time and effort on. Even if you did manage to fix their ease of use and cost, the net result from a bomb attack is so poor that they're a waste of time to bring to a fight. How to fix bombs: Make them into area denial weapons. Similar to mines or warp disruption bubbles, they would be launched towards a target like a torpedo, including locking/firing at an actual target. They would not simply be 'dropped', even with a forward velocity vector. Max range for the bombs would be 45km, after range/velocity skills. On impact, bombs detonate at the target point and engage an area effect bubble just like a warp disruption probe, only it does damage over time, for a limited time- say, 60 seconds or so. It does one damage pulse to any target in the bubble every 15 seconds. Bubble radius would be 25km, but similar to warp disrupt probes, overlapping bubbles wouldn't stack damage- you couldn't drop 50 bubbles on top of the same target and insta-kill everyhing in the area of effect. Anywhere two or more bubbles overlap, the highest damaging bubble takes effect. This encourages bomber pilots to spread their bombs out over multiple targets, and it encourages the enemy fleet to spread out or break up into smaller groups, so as not to be caught in a damage field. This design accomplishes accurae area denial in space, because you can aim/fire the bombs at specific targets, but you still have to be fairly close to a target to do so. Once the target is struck by a bomb, the bomb/damage field is fixed in place in space, the field doesn't travel with the target that it struck. Bombs will not be allowed to be targeted against gates, gate guns, concord billboards, or any sort of NPC structure or ship. They will be allowed to be targeted against drones. The same types of bombs apply: all four racial damage types, nos bombs, ecm bombs, etc. We could also have damp bombs, turret disruptor bombs, stasis field bombs, etc. The code and game structure for this sort of thing already exists between torps and warp disrupt/probe launchers. It shouldn't be difficult to implement, and it would accomplish the original goal of fighting tactical blobs. If the bombs don't put a big dent in fleets, then simply up their DPS until they do. So simple. [07:13:55] doctorstupid2 > what do i train now? [07:14:05] Trista Rotnor > little boys to 2 Fleet Combat Ships
ISEE ALL	Posted - 2007.10.11 11:54:00 - [7] so I guess ther's no chance to destroy t1/t2 frig/cruiser camp gangs with only one bomb at all?
Tonto Auri	Posted - 2007.10.11 13:12:00 - [8] Originally by: ISEE ALL so I guess ther's no chance to destroy t1/t2 frig/cruiser camp gangs with only one bomb at all? No unless You have CovOps cloak on bomber. Currently You just can't approach Your target in one piece. -- Thanks CCP for cu<end of sig>
Virgil Aquilis GoonFleet	Posted - 2007.10.11 14:35:00 - [9] Edited by: Virgil Aquilis on 11/10/2007 14:35:06 Have you tested them against Fighters yet? That's one place where I think bombs have always been an interesting idea, and if you don't have to drive directly into the fighterswarm to drop them now, so much the better.
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.10.11 17:44:00 - [10] Originally by: murder one Make them into area denial weapons. Similar to mines or warp disruption bubbles, they would be launched towards a target like a torpedo, including locking/firing at an actual target. They would not simply be 'dropped', even with a forward velocity vector. Max range for the bombs would be 45km, after range/velocity skills. On impact, bombs detonate at the target point and engage an area effect bubble just like a warp disruption probe, only it does damage over time, for a limited time- say, 60 seconds or so. It does one damage pulse to any target in the bubble every 15 seconds. You are talking about something vastly different than bombs, a totally different module that would be, in my opinion, significantly overpowered. The fact that you should need a dozen people to take out a large gate camp with bombers is a good thing. It balances out the impact of the AE damage on the enemy that you need the organization to accomplish it. The only problem now is that you cannot put significant enough bombs on target to accomplish the task because of their tendency to blow each other up. Originally by: ISEE ALL so I guess ther's no chance to destroy t1/t2 frig/cruiser camp gangs with only one bomb at all? Tech 1 frigates will generally die to 4 bombs assuming they don't power out of the blast sphere. However, their chance to power out should not be removed. In using the microwarp they make themselves much more vulnerable. Interceptors can be killed with a single bomb if the microwarp is on and they remain in the blast radius, I have killed 2 solo on TQ using a trick with bombs. However, interceptors will be able to clear the blast radius fast if they are aware of what is going on. Finally, assault frigates currently can not be killed at all with bombs. The bombs barely touch them. You would need 40 bombs to kill your average assault frigate and at 20 mil per pop, 800mil isk is a little expensive to kill an AF. Originally by: Tonto Auri Originally by: ISEE ALL so I guess ther's no chance to destroy t1/t2 frig/cruiser camp gangs with only one bomb at all? No unless You have CovOps cloak on bomber. Currently You just can't approach Your target in one piece. This is incorrect. With the proper piloting skills and the relevant char skill to run an improved cloak, it is quite easy to get close to a camp of a lot of ships. Its dangerous but that is the excitement of it. I believe a covops cloak on a bomber would make it overpowered. There has to be some drawback instead of unleashing instant death. If you want to be really stealthy you can warp to a spot off grid and come in under subwarp. However, I would say that I think bombers should be about 200% faster than they are now, when under cloak. Originally by: Virgil Aquilis Edited by: Virgil Aquilis on 11/10/2007 14:35:06 Have you tested them against Fighters yet? That's one place where I think bombs have always been an interesting idea, and if you don't have to drive directly into the fighterswarm to drop them now, so much the better. We didn't test that but my impression is that bombs would be ineffective against fighters due to the fighter's high HP and ability to instantly recalled to the drone bay of the capital ship when orbiting it. If the fighters are attacking a target, it would do serious damage to the friendly and posibily kill them, to take out the fighters. However, we will have to do more testing on this. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Udyr Vulpayne Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.10.11 18:16:00 - [11] Originally by: Rells ...at 20 mil per pop... are they still this expensive to produce? iirc there was talk about making them cheaper as well with rev3.
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.10.11 18:17:00 - [12] Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne Originally by: Rells ...at 20 mil per pop... are they still this expensive to produce? iirc there was talk about making them cheaper as well with rev3. Build reqs have not changed on Sisi at the time of our testing. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Tonto Auri	Posted - 2007.10.11 21:26:00 - [13] Originally by: Rells Originally by: Tonto Auri Originally by: ISEE ALL so I guess ther's no chance to destroy t1/t2 frig/cruiser camp gangs with only one bomb at all? No unless You have CovOps cloak on bomber. Currently You just can't approach Your target in one piece. This is incorrect. With the proper piloting skills and the relevant char skill to run an improved cloak, it is quite easy to get close to a camp of a lot of ships. Its dangerous but that is the excitement of it. I believe a covops cloak on a bomber would make it overpowered. There has to be some drawback instead of unleashing instant death. If you want to be really stealthy you can warp to a spot off grid and come in under subwarp. However, I would say that I think bombers should be about 200% faster than they are now, when under cloak. How far off from grid? 1000 km? I remember from class when ships landing 240-400km far from gate, they still present in overview. Is it changed somewhat? Also, covops cloak not means that You will be able to kill Your targets instantly. It only allow You to came to spot unnoticed. But You may still be caught by interceptors and recons at time of decloaking. I already have one suggestion to this thing. Can You please take a look and say what You think about it? But... 4 bombs to kill single T1 frigate... ridiculous... Even if single bomb will be 2mil to build... I believe it is mistake of some sort from CCP's design department... -- Thanks CCP for cu<end of sig>
Minmatar Escapee	Posted - 2007.10.11 22:41:00 - [14] Restore the stealth bomber to it's original role. Destroyer Class Heavy Bomber with ability to fit 3 bomb launchers. Change Bombs and Launcher. Bomb still does AE damage, but flies at 2000m/s to the target vessel for up to 100km and impacts on target ship or it's location if it's warped out. ROF on launcher set to 45s with skills dropping it to 30s. 1 Bomb should pwn a frig class ship. But we play EVE -eliminate "Should" from vocabulary and things make sense. Doomsdays should likewise instapop anything CS size or smaller -especially after seeing a flycatcher with uber explosive resists survive one. Doomsday needs to do it's racial damage -increase it a bit more for the limited role it has after all, then make it do 1/4 of the racial damage in every other damage type.
Minmatar Escapee	Posted - 2007.10.11 22:42:00 - [15] Originally by: Virgil Aquilis Edited by: Virgil Aquilis on 11/10/2007 14:35:06 Have you tested them against Fighters yet? That's one place where I think bombs have always been an interesting idea, and if you don't have to drive directly into the fighterswarm to drop them now, so much the better. 1 bomb will take down a fighter to about half shields, just make sure you have the right bomb for the job.
Kai Lae Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.12 06:15:00 - [16] Originally by: Rells The results of this test lead me to the following reccomendations: Resistance to a bomb's own damage type should be upped to 99.95% to allow the opponents to launch as many concurrent bombs as they can deploy with their resources. Because the resistance to other damage is 0, it should not affect their ability to be destroyed by smartbombs. Bomb velocity should be raised to 2km / second giving a travel distance of 30 km over the same time and making it easier for the bombers to evade. Light and fast ships should still be able to take them on. The forward trajectory dumb launch is effective for lauching bombs and introduces a new paradigm of shooting. It would be better if the ship didnt auto-level in space however. Bomb base build cost should be about 10 million isk per bomb to make it cost effective yet not outrageous. Tech 2 bombs (Bomb Deployment 5). One kind that has a bigger blast radius of 20km blast range and another the has more damage. These bombs should be like normal tech 2 ammo. Lockbreaker bombs should have higher jamming strength. Stealth bomber cloaked velocity should be increased by 200%. This should only be their cloaked velocity and not their normal velocity. This will prevent them from being used as cruise firing interceptors (as MWD cannot be engaged while cloaked) yet allow them to crawl in from off grid to form up attacks without giving them a covops cloak. As someone who has used bombers in the past a fair amount, I agree that these are excellent ideas. Generally a bomber actually does not need to avoid it's own bomb blast - it's sig radius is low enough (assuming you didn't fit a MWD or shield extender, right?) that a bomb won't even get through it's armor. However it's pretty ludicrous that when you use a weapon, you usually not only hit the enemy but yourself as well. However the catch currently is that nearly EVERYONE fits a MWD, because bombers aren't fast enough cloaked to evade fast targets at close range. You therefore get what seems frequently like a suicide weapon. However, the number one limiting factor on a bomb currently is simply that they have a ludicrous cost. The OP suggests fixing this from about the 18m to 10m. I disagree. They should be about 2m. This is a expendable bomb. Even at 2m, a coordinated bomb drop on a group of targets (assume 4 bombs) is 8m - the cost of a T1 tier 3 cruiser - yet won't kill anything under cruiser size. If the cost was 10m, a attack of this type would cost about 40m and might not even kill anything. In comparison, currently a fighter costs about 18m as well. Unlike a bomb, while it has no AoE effect, it is reusable, follows targets into warp, is harder to destroy, and is arguably much more dangerous. Fix these issues CCP.
Icome4u Caldari Dark and Light inc. D-L	Posted - 2007.10.12 08:08:00 - [17] Guys...wtf people... Bombs are not suppose to go insta pop anything... Reason 4 is the max before they pop each other is because like everything else in this game it would be abused if their was no limit. Why 4? Why not... As if freaking smartbombs are not bad enough, bombs sure doesn't need any kind of boosts. Bombs are here to 'harass' ships and add some damage like smartbombs do. Got a carrier/drone problem? Drop a couple bombs. Add a smartbomb BS or two and voila. It's NOT a mini DDD and it will NEVER be. ______ Originally by: Vyger If I lose connection while walking around a station will my avatar run off in a random direction and go hide in a corner?
ISEE ALL	Posted - 2007.10.12 08:15:00 - [18] Originally by: Tonto Auri No unless You have CovOps cloak on bomber. Currently You just can't approach Your target in one piece. well if you are cloaked (improved cloaking device II) already and some gang decided to camp - aproach & bombs away; alternatively, you can warp to the gate at ~70km and cloak, mwd and approach (don't forget to fit overdrives) best choice in this case will be Hound SB for its speed (I've managed to speed it up to around 2 km/s cloaked with t2 overdrives and lev 5 covert ops skill) but thats only theories, I had no chance to try it out in field yet :/
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.10.12 09:01:00 - [19] 20 mil per shot is a bit steep for harassment. Furthermore, if the fleet can easily tank it, it isnt very harassing. So we expend 20 mil to kill some drones (assuming the guy doesnt recall them before it goes off)? That line of reasoning is not forward thinking. As for the destroyer idea, I disagree. The balance of the bombs as a weapon is the need for significant organization and piloting skills. iving a destroyer the chance to instapop cruisers is just asking for an imbalance. Furthermore, this role is exactly what SBs were envisioned as. I would also give them one more launcher hardpoint to improve their weapons diversity and use that useless 5th slot. That or move that slot to a low or medium. If you get 20 bombers in position, the other fleet doesnt see the bombs, is sitting still on a gate, lets 20 stealth bombers approach them and lets themselves get trapped on the side of the gate, they deserve to die. Poeple need to think a little bit deeper than "muahhhahahahah I have more guns than you" and people need to wake up and start thinking tactically. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Udyr Vulpayne Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.10.12 09:59:00 - [20] Originally by: Rells Build reqs have not changed on Sisi at the time of our testing. well this should definately be lowerd some then. but i wouldnt go and boost damage any further without seeing if they are used more often with the forward deployment. make them cheaper to use and they will be good enough without kiling the things in their blast area. simply damaging/weakening ships before you engage with the full fleeet/with snipers can be worthwile as well. or use the bombs to drive people off a location.
Gecko O'Bac Aquilae Stellaris YouWhat	Posted - 2007.10.12 11:08:00 - [21] Bah, imho bombs should be quite radically changed... I'm not really sure how, but they're NOT the blob breakers they were meant to be. A BS blob (which is what we're talking about... A cruiser/frig blob isn't that common (usually they're used for roaming gangs, which do not pose a "blob" problem in my opinion. Hell, they're one of the few funny things in pvp at the moment since fleet battles are blob/lagfests), while a BS blob is.
ISEE ALL	Posted - 2007.10.12 11:38:00 - [22] Originally by: Rells 20 mil per shot is a bit steep for harassment. I build them myself for ~12mil (Amarr SS, minerals bought right at the station from sell orders) BPC set for all bombs x1000runs optimal ME & bomblauncher - from contracts for 15mil If you really like to boom, the price is quite affordable (of course, the price for modules and the ship and the implants should be included in case of unsuccessful escape - that would be around 15+mil :)
Ammath Amarr Exanimo Inc Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.12 11:59:00 - [23] Frankly they should cost about 5-7mil even with the changes. Also you should be able to fit two bomb launchers on a stealth bomber. Also because they keep not wanting to do anything useful with destroyers I second having a 'heavy bomber' variant destroyer which could mount double the bomb launchers of a frig based one. So if frigs go to two, give them 4 (and cloak speed etc). Also anyone check can you float bombs on SISI into a pos shield? That would make them REALLY nice :)
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.10.12 16:17:00 - [24] Originally by: Ammath Frankly they should cost about 5-7mil even with the changes. Also you should be able to fit two bomb launchers on a stealth bomber. Also because they keep not wanting to do anything useful with destroyers I second having a 'heavy bomber' variant destroyer which could mount double the bomb launchers of a frig based one. So if frigs go to two, give them 4 (and cloak speed etc). Also anyone check can you float bombs on SISI into a pos shield? That would make them REALLY nice :) A destroyer is an EXTREMELY useful piece of hardware. The fact that you havent figured out how to use it is not CCPs problem. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Hellaciouss Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.10.12 18:38:00 - [25] Bombs still blow up if you warp away. Drop bomb -> warp
Kakita J Placid Reborn The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2007.10.12 21:50:00 - [26] Could someone please give a good reason (with an example scenario) of how it would be overpowered to have SBs fit cov ops cloaks? -------------------------------------- "They better fix the bleep bleep bleep jump bleep gates before I bleepbleepbleep and then some."
Tonto Auri	Posted - 2007.10.12 23:19:00 - [27] Originally by: Rells If you get 20 bombers in position, the other fleet doesnt see the bombs, is sitting still on a gate, lets 20 stealth bombers approach them and lets themselves get trapped on the side of the gate, they deserve to die. Poeple need to think a little bit deeper than "muahhhahahahah I have more guns than you" and people need to wake up and start thinking tactically. "If you get 20 bombers in position" - can You please explain, how are You getting 20 bombers in position at grid of camped gate? Assuming that it's camped by people, who aren't absolutely blind. And they see tha there's 20 reds in local, where I haven't saw any camp bigger than 5-7 ppl. -- Thanks CCP for cu<end of sig>
Orcrus	Posted - 2007.10.13 00:08:00 - [28] Edited by: Orcrus on 13/10/2007 00:09:10 Originally by: Kakita J Could someone please give a good reason (with an example scenario) of how it would be overpowered to have SBs fit cov ops cloaks? Example t2 cloaking device has 40% scan acquisition penalty. With this "buff" a SB could fit a warp core stabilizer and never have to worry about being killed again, (edit) and have a ridiculously high scan and targeting range yet...
Terranid Meester Knights Hospitalier	Posted - 2007.10.13 02:32:00 - [29] Edited by: Terranid Meester on 13/10/2007 02:33:30 Personally I think damaging bombs should be used to cripple the largest vessels like capital ships and battleships while drones and frigates should have a reasonable chance of success to escape. Maybe depending on how close a ship is to the bomb when it explodes should determine its damage. For example a bomb exploding 15-1km away froma capital ship should do similiar damage (due to the size of the vessel) while with fighters, drones and frigates a bomb exploding near to one would vapourise it instantly but at a further distance it wouldn't touch them as much. Not sure if that idea should go here but feel free to add it to the ideas forum if you think it makes any sense. The energy neutralizer bombs might be more useful against small targets at any rate.
Bomazi	Posted - 2007.10.13 03:16:00 - [30] Edited by: Bomazi on 13/10/2007 03:17:03 Originally by: Orcrus Edited by: Orcrus on 13/10/2007 00:23:11 Edited by: Orcrus on 13/10/2007 00:22:02 Edited by: Orcrus on 13/10/2007 00:09:10 Originally by: Kakita J Could someone please give a good reason (with an example scenario) of how it would be overpowered to have SBs fit cov ops cloaks? Example t2 cloaking device has 40% scan acquisition penalty. With this "buff" a SB could fit a warp core stabilizer and never have to worry about being killed again, (edit) and have a ridiculously high scan and targeting range yet... 2 warp stabs 3 sensorbooster 2s 1 shield extender 2 whatever you want in your highs covert ops sensor booster rigs probably 2 hydraulic bay thrusters it will now take 3 points to keep you still your movement speed is 933 cloaked. 659 scan 123km targeting range... The loadout you listed requires too much powergrid. With the loadout you specified, you would need to use t1 best named medium and a named MAPC. Or use a powergrid rig that cost considerably more. If you were meaning a small shield extender, I wouldn't waste the slot.

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.