EVE Search - If the Eagle is getting a boost, what about the Muninn?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

If the Eagle is getting a boost, what about the Muninn?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer Atrum Tempestas Foedus	Posted - 2008.03.02 19:25:00 - [31] Increase damage mod and decrease teh RoF. Same DPS, more arty like alpha damage. ----------------- Friends Forever
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.02 23:12:00 - [32] Originally by: Rid*** Valer* Assuming that the Muninn has an alpha of 1250, and the Eagle has an alpha of 850, lets look at the following situation. What ranges are these ? These are the numbers I got with the following set ups. Eagle : 2 SBII's / 2 TC II's / 3 MAGSTAB II's / 1 TE II - 4 250MM II's / 10mn MWDII Munnin: 2 GS II's / 3 TE II's / 2 SB II's / 5 - 720mm II's / 10mn MWD II In a close range ammo scenario with scripts set for speed and tracking. Munnin 2260Alpha / 327DPS at 32km+22 FO / .047 tracking - 820 scan res (faction EMP used) Eagle 910Alpha / 259DPS at 47km+15 FO / .049 tracking - 702 scan res (faction AM used) At a long range for the Munnin, medium range for the Eagle Scenario Munnin 1233Alpha / 178 DPS at 102km+22 FO / .047 tracking - 437 scan res (faction carb lead) Eagle 607Alpha / 173 DPS at 105km+15 FO / .04 tracking - 473 scan res (faction lead) And of course the extreme range eagle Eagle 528Alpha / 150 DPS at 206km+15 FO / .007 tracking - 288 scan res (Spike) I really dont see a situation under 120km where the Eagle is ever better than the Munnin , this also doesnt take into account that the Munnin has a 25m3 dronebay (which arent used for calculations) doesnt use cap for its guns, and the more nimble autocannon Munnin works MUCH MUCH better than a blaster eagle which needs the skill HAC 5 just to outdps its T1 variant the MOA. A 5 250mmII Eagle(if it happens) will also have no grid left for tank OR a MWD, which would make the ship even more 1 dimensional. Regardless a 5 gun Zealot is going to obsolete both ships anyways
Depp Knight Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.03 01:33:00 - [33] Eagle getting a 5th turret slot? What about the vulture, will it get 8 hi's and 6 turret slots?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.03 02:11:00 - [34] Edited by: Goumindong on 03/03/2008 02:13:29 Originally by: Rastigan bunch of wrong stuff 1. We are working on the new 5 turret eagle, not the current 4 turret eagle. 2. Use faction ammo. Only the eagle has the range to make use of long range t2 ammo. Specificially trade down to thorium for the eagle. A 5 gun zealot will not be obsoleting them both. LOL @ a tank on a long range anti-support cruiser.
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.03 02:47:00 - [35] Originally by: Goumindong 1. We are working on the new 5 turret eagle, not the current 4 turret eagle. Multiply the Eagles damage by 1.25 to compare it to 5 turrets. Quote: edit: God, another fool trumpeting the AC muninn. You should pretty much never need to fly an AC muninn over the vagabond. An armor tanked vagabond is better than an AC muninn. An armor tanked vagabond is better than an AC muninn. Let that sink in for a second for what that means. An AC Muninn is still eleventy billion times a better idea than a blaster Eagle. How is a 5 gun Eagle going to be fit ? I rarely fly Eagles because as it is, its a crappy ship to fly ( I use Vultures instead .)
Ath Amon	Posted - 2008.03.03 03:09:00 - [36] imo more problem of weapon system than of ship itself arty is not anymore comparable to rails, it comes in "gimp status" because it is supposed to take advantage of things that don't impact that much the long ranged combat (the ones that where mentioned earlier) for what i see minnie have not anymore good long ranged ships as arty is the turret with: worst dps (by a huge margin), worst range (ok is a close call with lasers :P) and worst tracking... it get alpha but that is not that huge as you are not going to instapop anything bigger than a shuttle and still (a thing that many people tend to forget) the refire doesn't get a reset if i kill a ship nor the battle stop to make you reload after blowing up an enemy boost dps of arty to be between lasers and rails or make it long range and good tracking... that will solve a lot of problem for minnie ships... from the muninn to the nag Originally by: Diana Merris Unfortunately, rather than address the slot layout/tanking issues for Minmatar the Devs have simple declared that it makes us "versitile".
X99 Z990	Posted - 2008.03.03 03:10:00 - [37] Originally by: Haniblecter Teg Increase damage mod and decrease teh RoF. Same DPS, more arty like alpha damage. I like that idea, and with only 10 shots per gun would have slightly more dps over time including reloads. Nothing bad about it. I love locking things with sleipnir and saying "pop" then 3 secs later when the shots fire its "pop".
SirMoric Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.03.03 03:27:00 - [38] I hear a lot of theoretical stuff in this thread. But does anyone have any experience fighthing in an Eagle, or even better, been up against a Muninn in an Eagle, or the other way around? If the Eagle got an extra turret, it must've been because it needed it? I don't recall many threads whining about the Eagle in the past that it would explain why it got it. Oh, and boost missiles by the way.... seems odd you get almost no damage done when hitting a really fast ship.... on the front. rgds
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2008.03.03 04:09:00 - [39] Edited by: welsh wizard on 03/03/2008 04:10:45 Eagle is going to be comparable in fleet at 100km, getting better as the range gets higher. Muninn will remain better at everything else. Muninns alpha will remain unique and it will retain its use in an anti-support role at sub-120km ranges because of it. Muninn pops support or forces it out alot more effectively than the Eagle does/will after the change at sub 120km. It's clear to me which ship remains more restricted in its use. It makes up for it by being the last word in long range anti-support combat. The muninn on the other hand offers a variable role design. Despite all this Goumindong# idea to give the Eagle 25m3 worth of drone bay was just as acceptable as 5 guns imo. I don't think 5 guns will imbalance the ship class personally, the Eagle still only has a single effective role, its just very good at it now. --------------- you all smell!
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.03 05:37:00 - [40] Originally by: SirMoric I hear a lot of theoretical stuff in this thread. But does anyone have any experience fighthing in an Eagle, or even better, been up against a Muninn in an Eagle, or the other way around? Yes, and eagles are currently more effective anti-support than Muninns in practice. Especially in practice with high lag. [which makes range more variable increasing the need for long range ammo] Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 03/03/2008 04:10:45 Eagle is going to be comparable in fleet at 100km, getting better as the range gets higher. Muninn will remain better at everything else. Unfortunatly, "everything else" is a moot when its a specific role taken up by some other ship. If the eagle didnt do enough damage at the end of its range then they could have given it a boost to its DPS out there[ammo specific boost], if the eagle didnt do enough damage at the begining of its range they could have added damage down there[more missiles/drones/ammo specific boost]. As is is though, it totally eclipses the Muninn and Zealot. Originally by: Rastigan Multiply the Eagles damage by 1.25 to compare it to 5 turrets. I did, its why you have a 242 DPS eagle at 95km. [CN thorium] Quote: An AC Muninn is still eleventy billion times a better idea than a blaster Eagle. How is a 5 gun Eagle going to be fit ? I rarely fly Eagles because as it is, its a crappy ship to fly ( I use Vultures instead .) Eleventy billion times zero is still zero. Actually, that just plain isnt true. Blaster eagles do fairly decent dps with huge shield amounts and great relative speed/agility. Since, unlike armor tanked ships they can tank themselves without reducing their agility and speed, they actually make one of the faster and most agile tanked HAC tacklers while puting out respectable DPS. This actually gives them a role over the deimos, where the deimos in order to achieve eagle quality hit points must sacrifice all its agility and speed advantage[1600rt + trimarks]. Its still probably better for an eagle pilot to skill a deimos though. Of course, for the Vagabond there is simply no comparison. Its faster than the Muninn, has a falloff bonus over the Muninn, more agile, has a smaller sig, does nearly as much raw dps and much more real dps[falloff bonus], and has an extra med slot for either tanking or ewar.[This is assuming the utterly ridiculuos armor tanked vagabond which, despite being ridiculous is still better than the AC muninn]. And to top it off no other skill training is required. These things combine to mean that the beagle is probably a better bet than the AC muninn, since there is no close range option on the same skill path as the Eagle and there is a close range option on the same skill path as the Muninn.
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.03 05:52:00 - [41] Yep, saw this one coming... The Eagle is not overpowered, it's exactly where it should be now that it has 5 guns. Yes, it's better than the Muninn as an anti-support sniper (the Zealot is NOT primarily a sniper, and is not relevant), but that's how it should be. Caldari are the sniper race, and should have the best snipers in the game. Complaining about this is as stupid as complaining that the Vagabond is the best speed HAC in the game. The problem with the Muninn is it doesn't know what it wants to be. Is it an AC boat? No, the Vagabond beats it by far as a fast skirmish ship, and the Hurricane beats it in a slugging match. Is it an artillery sniper? No, it has a terrible slot layout, poor bonuses, and still loses to the Hurricane once cost-effectiveness is considered. Is it a close-range artillery one-shot-cruisers ship? No, the Hurricane wins there again. So the first thing to do before fixing the Muninn is to figure out what it's supposed to be. Until it gets a clearly defined role, trying to balance it makes no sense.
Felix Dzerzhinsky legion of qui Black Star Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.03 05:59:00 - [42] Originally by: darkmancer I don't know why people bother arguing with Goumindong anymore. It's like arguing with the backside of an elephant suffering from explosive diarrhea They don't argue with him because he is right most of the time. . .I have not seen anyone disprove him. I think the OP had a good point and others have brought it up - the issue with the Munin is not the ship, its the wepon system - Artilleries. I cannot however ever come up with a reason to buff them though. . .they are capless, have great falloff and do variable damage. Those advantages, along with the high alpha nature of the gun make it potent if used correctly. . .I cannot see a way to improve them without completly outclassing the other wepons systems the way AC has. The changes to the Eagle were good, its still a very situational ship still. I don't think we will be seeing them on roaming ops. The Zelot also needed the change imo - although not increacing the grid is going to make it a very tough ship to fit. With the Munin, its not about adding more guns. . .its about changing artillery which sounds like a very delicate and potentially overpowering thing to be toying with. ---- GO BLUE!!
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.03 06:55:00 - [43] Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 03/03/2008 06:57:04 Originally by: Felix Dzerzhinsky They don't argue with him because he is right most of the time. . .I have not seen anyone disprove him. You haven't seen anyone disprove him because he's set himself up so that he's immune to disproof. He makes four flawed assumptions: 1) That the Eagle, Vulture, Zealot and Muninn are all anti-support snipers above all else. 2) That all of them must be equally good at the job, regardless of any other factors. 3) That the only relevant factor in balance is a graph of dps over infinite time vs. range. 4) That the only acceptable targets for these ships are high-transverasal interceptors, allowing him to ignore T2 ammo. If you give him these, of course you can't disprove him, his conclusions follow perfectly from those assumptions. The problem is his assumptions are flawed, making his argument entirely worthless. 1) is false. The Eagle and Vulture are dedicated snipers. The Zealot is a close-range gank HAC and balanced as such, but it has a decent secondary role as a mid-range sniper. The Muninn is just a confused mess. 2) is even more false. The Eagle and Vulture are elite snipers from the long-range race, and should be better than all others (just as the Vagabond is the speed HAC from the speed race, and so should be best at being a fast HAC). The Vulture, as a BC-class ship and the endgame for anti-support snipers, should be better than the Eagle. The Zealot should not be as good as either, because the sniper setup is a secondary role, and a secondary setup should never beat a dedicated ship in the same class. The Muninn should not be as good because it is not properly dedicated to the role (too few mids, tracking over range, etc). Obviously a ship (Muninn, Zealot) with one optimal bonus and another useful bonus should NOT snipe as well as a ship that gives up twice as many bonuses for range. 3) is just absurd. Goumindong's balance methods completely ignore alpha strike, taking ability, secondary roles, etc. 4) is again proof that he just flies EFT. Yes, interceptors are important targets, but you do end up shooting at other things (heavy interdictors, ewar cruisers, etc). Ignoring performance against these targets is just dishonest.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.03 07:55:00 - [44] Amarr are the tank/gank race and so should have their ships with the most hit points and highest dps of all ships in the game. Oh wait, its not fun when ships are better and not different... 1. I do not ignore alpha strike, et all. Its simply that that the eagle is equal or better where the muninn ought to be AS WELL as the premiere long range ship. You simply lie because otherwise you have no in against the argument. 2. I do not ignore shooting cruisers et all. But your primary target is interceptors and you will not be able to change ammos in a fight. If you are going after cruisers et all, then you would be better off every time in a battleship. I can see the argument that the zealot has more versitility in the medium range, but the Muninn doesnt. Its an anti-support sniper. I know you dont like the fact that the vulture and eagle aren't currently horribly overpowered, and that CCP doesnt think that the vulture should be the ultimate end game anti-support sniper[as it is now], but really you are just going to have to deal with being very good at your role and not "overpowered" in your role.
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.03 08:28:00 - [45] Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 03/03/2008 08:29:27 Originally by: Goumindong Amarr are the tank/gank race and so should have their ships with the most hit points and highest dps of all ships in the game. This would be true, if Amarr were actually the tank/gank race... tank, maybe, but Gallente are the gank race. I could see boosting Amarr tanking ability, but I don't think anyone wants a one-dimensional tank race. Without completely wrecking game balance, you can't make tanking enough of an advantage to make people pick them over the other races. Quote: 1. I do not ignore alpha strike, et all. Its simply that that the eagle is equal or better where the muninn ought to be AS WELL as the premiere long range ship. You simply lie because otherwise you have no in against the argument. Thank you for proving my point here. The Eagle is NOT better at the Muninn's range, because of alpha strike! Your pretty little dps graphs show damage over infinite time, ignoring the fact that artillery are supposed to have the lowest damage over infinite time and the highest alpha strike to make up for it. Quote: 2. I do not ignore shooting cruisers et all. But your primary target is interceptors and you will not be able to change ammos in a fight. If you are going after cruisers et all, then you would be better off every time in a battleship. Yes, we should balance for laggy fleet fights where you can't change ammo. Brilliant idea. Then when the node can actually handle the fight, whether because of small gang size or because CCP finally fixes the lag problems, we'll just go back and fix everything again. Or we could, you know, do everything right the first time... And yes, your primary target is interceptors. But what do you do once the interceptors are dead? Here's a hint: it isn't "sit there doing nothing". Even if the Eagle is better at killing interceptors, you have to consider the fact that the other two are better at killing larger ships. It's entirely legitimate to trade a little anti-interceptor performance for better performance once the interceptors are dead. Of course by your lag argument, the Zealot is unfairly powerful. Since it has unlimited ammo and never needs to reload, it has massively better damage output over a long fight. When the Eagle and Muninn run out of ammo in their guns and get stuck spending the next hour trying to reload, the Zealot is still shooting. BROKEN! Quote: I can see the argument that the zealot has more versitility in the medium range, but the Muninn doesnt. Its an anti-support sniper. I know you dont like the fact that the vulture and eagle aren't currently horribly overpowered, and that CCP doesnt think that the vulture should be the ultimate end game anti-support sniper[as it is now], but really you are just going to have to deal with being very good at your role and not "overpowered" in your role. Ok, two very basic facts here: 1) The Eagle is a Caldari ship, and should be better than the Muninn as a sniper, just like the Vagabond is better than any Caldari ship at being a fast HAC. 2) The Eagle gives up two bonuses for range, while the Muninn only sacrifices one. Why should the ship that makes fewer sacrifices towards specializing in sniping be as good as the ship that dedicates everything? Again, the Muninn is broken because CCP can't decide what the ship is actually supposed to do. It has the slot layout of an armor-tanked AC boat with the wrong resists, one bonus towards being a sniper but the wrong slot layout, and one bonus towards short-range artillery ganking with inferior performance compared to the cheaper Hurricane. The result is obvious, it's poor in all of those roles. Once CCP picks a single role, we can start to balance it properly for that role.
Julio Torres Phantom Squad Insurgency	Posted - 2008.03.03 09:04:00 - [46] Originally by: Goumindong 2. I do not ignore shooting cruisers et all. But your primary target is interceptors and you will not be able to change ammos in a fight. If you are going after cruisers et all, then you would be better off every time in a battleship. Those battleships will be busy shooting other battleships. So it is irrelevant how much better they are at it.
Tyr Zewa Caldari Tax Collectors	Posted - 2008.03.03 10:37:00 - [47] Same problem the tempest will have next patch. Other ships get boosted over and over again, their weaponry too, and in the end the unboosted ships get left behind.
Jeetah	Posted - 2008.03.03 11:00:00 - [48] Originally by: Haniblecter Teg I'd say damage too. Its its alpha strike taht should be uber. Up the damage mod and lower the RoF imho. This is actually a very good idea. It'd also solve the problem of having only 10 rounds/cannon, which is laughable.
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2008.03.03 11:43:00 - [49] Edited by: welsh wizard on 03/03/2008 11:44:44 Originally by: Merin Ryskin ...Complaining about this is as stupid as complaining that the Vagabond is the best speed HAC in the game. So simple and yet so very true. Infact, sniping is even more of a niche than going fast is. --------------- you all smell!
Sergo Mor'Zert	Posted - 2008.03.03 11:59:00 - [50] Originally by: Merin RyskinAgain, the Muninn is broken because CCP can't decide what the ship is actually supposed to do. It has the slot layout of an armor-tanked AC boat with the wrong resists, one bonus towards being a sniper but the wrong slot layout, and one bonus towards short-range artillery ganking with inferior performance compared to the cheaper Hurricane. The result is obvious, it's poor in all of those roles. Once CCP picks a single role, we can start to balance it properly for that role.[/quote ding ding and we have the winner truth is this ship is badly designed, slot layout is just pain; amount of lows and meds should be switched and we would get closer to balance, last final touch would be swaping 5% rof for 5% dmg so we would end up with 10% dmg per level, so its alpha would be more clearly emphasized as its unique advantage. two small steps and ship will be balanced, but as we all know first step is the hardest:P
Ath Amon	Posted - 2008.03.03 12:25:00 - [51] Edited by: Ath Amon on 03/03/2008 12:26:28 Originally by: Merin Ryskin Again, the Muninn is broken because CCP can't decide what the ship is actually supposed to do. It has the slot layout of an armor-tanked AC boat with the wrong resists, one bonus towards being a sniper but the wrong slot layout, and one bonus towards short-range artillery ganking with inferior performance compared to the cheaper Hurricane. The result is obvious, it's poor in all of those roles. Once CCP picks a single role, we can start to balance it properly for that role. i partially disagree with that... about slot allocation it have too many high slots that it doesnt use (2 unused high vs 1 of other races) considering that is supposed to be a long range ship it should get that slot moved to mid or low (mid prob bit better). about bonuses i disagree, tracking is important for a ship like this. even with the bonus is so easy to avoid most of its dmg keeping a bit of trasnv velocity. also the fact that arties have poor range doesn't help as you have the option to stay further away to make transv less an issue. sure if the enemy run at you thats not a big problem, but at that point muninn or a BS doesnt matter but against more experienced pilots that a big factor to consider. so again this is imo more a problem of gimp arties... arties where designed when the game was very different, when alpha was really a balancing factor and got they tracking nerfed on purpose... but now we are not anymore in that conditions... Originally by: Diana Merris Unfortunately, rather than address the slot layout/tanking issues for Minmatar the Devs have simple declared that it makes us "versitile".
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.03 12:49:00 - [52] Edited by: Rastigan on 03/03/2008 12:48:54 Originally by: Tyr Zewa Same problem the tempest will have next patch. Other ships get boosted over and over again, their weaponry too, and in the end the unboosted ships get left behind. They arent buffing any other sniping battleship, what problem will the Tempest have ? The only problem the Tempest has is that Minmatar ships are normally the best of each class so they are kind of used to EVERY ship type dominating. I think the slot layout of the ship sucks 7/3/5 (unbonused missle launchers on a specialized ship are a joke).. would the ship be better if it was 5/4/5, 5/3/6, or if it lost its drone bay for an extra low or medium slot ?
NeoTheo Final Conflict UK SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.03 12:55:00 - [53] not everyone uses these ships for Anti support, you really need to get off that bandwagon, and talk about more general issues with the ships dude. not everyone sits in lag infested fleets, sniping in bound ceptors. in more general roles the eagle was vastly underpowered, i dont doubt this fix has messed up the fleet role a bit, but i honestly dont see a better solution, the munin has better bonuses than the eagle for shooting in the first place, its just with the slot layout it does not work. ------- woot a sig ------- Linkage
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.03 14:10:00 - [54] Originally by: Julio Torres Originally by: Goumindong 2. I do not ignore shooting cruisers et all. But your primary target is interceptors and you will not be able to change ammos in a fight. If you are going after cruisers et all, then you would be better off every time in a battleship. Those battleships will be busy shooting other battleships. So it is irrelevant how much better they are at it. No, its not. If you have a job to do you bring the best ship for the job. I.E. who wins this fight 40 battleships + 10 support + 10 anti-support vs 30 battleships + 10 HACs shooting HACs + 10 support + 10 anti-support? A: The 40 battleship gang. 10 of those battleships can shoot HACs and they will still be better off than the 30 battleship gang. Making the determination that they ought to be shooting battleships instead of cruisers simply reinforces the point that the anti-support HACs should not be shooting cruisers, since this is a value determination and you have determined that the value of the ship to shoot cruisers is less valuable than the value of the ship to shoot battleships.
Nasta443	Posted - 2008.03.03 14:47:00 - [55] Originally by: Rastigan They arent buffing any other sniping battleship, what problem will the Tempest have ? The only problem the Tempest has is that Minmatar ships are normally the best of each class so they are kind of used to EVERY ship type dominating. That's a load of bull excrement and you know it. minmatar ships, right now, are probably in the 4th place out of 4
Sue Mee	Posted - 2008.03.03 16:29:00 - [56] i think that munnin's biggest problem is a minmatar feature: extra high slots. same as almost any other minmatar ship (specially cyclone and tempest), munnin has far too many high slots, or too few turret slots. many minmatar ships would benefit if they'd loose 1/2 high and won that many low/mid slots.
Omarvelous Destry's Lounge XIII Legio	Posted - 2008.03.03 17:13:00 - [57] Originally by: Sue Mee i think that munnin's biggest problem is a minmatar feature: extra high slots. same as almost any other minmatar ship (specially cyclone and tempest), munnin has far too many high slots, or too few turret slots. many minmatar ships would benefit if they'd loose 1/2 high and won that many low/mid slots. Yep - that's a problem that ONLY the Minmitar have... __________________________________________________ Sup brosef! Destry's Lounge is looking for a few good drunks - contact me in game.
Sue Mee	Posted - 2008.03.03 17:30:00 - [58] Originally by: Omarvelous Originally by: Sue Mee i think that munnin's biggest problem is a minmatar feature: extra high slots. same as almost any other minmatar ship (specially cyclone and tempest), munnin has far too many high slots, or too few turret slots. many minmatar ships would benefit if they'd loose 1/2 high and won that many low/mid slots. Yep - that's a problem that ONLY the Minmitar have... no, but its much more pronounced on minmatar.
xxxak	Posted - 2008.03.03 17:44:00 - [59] Minmatar easily have the best HAC (Vaga) and the best Recons. I don't think the Munnin really needs buffing. If it did, then there would be NO reason to fly Caldari.
Cool Goose	Posted - 2008.03.03 18:24:00 - [60] The only thing that annoys me at the Muninn is that most of it's resistances are on the shield and not the armor even if it's an armor taking ship.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: 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.