EVE Search - Zulupark proposed fix to AF.... WTF?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Zulupark proposed fix to AF.... WTF?

» 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 - 1 post(s)
RuleoftheBone Minmatar Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.03.11 10:21:00 - [61] Edited by: RuleoftheBone on 11/03/2008 10:24:50 Edited by: RuleoftheBone on 11/03/2008 10:21:41 Web immunity...bleah. How bout something a little more creative and less immersion killing? "Oh...btw...the new paint on your hull magically allows the web to slide off you without effect". Snore....back to the drawing board please. Surely the devs can do better than the dreaded "Cloak of Haste" . EditIf this web immunity thing goes through...at least change the name as I fail to see how "Boots of Speed" remotely make these ships worthy of the name "Assault". "Lead Me..Follow Me..Or get the **** out of my way" General George Patton USA
Plave Okice Gallente Red. Red Republic	Posted - 2008.03.11 10:25:00 - [62] Originally by: Saint Lazarus If AF's had web immunity I would fly nothing else......ever ^^ This ^ I'll train assault frigate V too. Red CEORed Vs Blue
Arana Tellen Gallente The Blackguard Wolves Black Star Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.11 10:27:00 - [63] Originally by: RuleoftheBone Edited by: RuleoftheBone on 11/03/2008 10:24:50 Edited by: RuleoftheBone on 11/03/2008 10:21:41 Web immunity...bleah. How bout something a little more creative and less immersion killing? "Oh...btw...the new paint on your hull magically allows the web to slide off you without effect". Snore....back to the drawing board please. Surely the devs can do better than the dreaded "Cloak of Haste" . EditIf this web immunity thing goes through...at least change the name as I fail to see how "Boots of Speed" remotely make these ships worthy of the name "Assault". If Eve ever lets RP get too much in the way of propper game balance, it dies. --------------------------------- Oh noes! Originally by: CCP Greyscale moderated - mother abuse - Mitnal
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.03.11 10:36:00 - [64] Originally by: RuleoftheBone How bout something a little more creative and less immersion killing? Well, if you want to go the "realism" route (which isn't that easy in EVE, since EVE physics have very little to do with the real thing :), consider this: webs are ewar effects; it's not like there is a physical "web" holding the ship in place, it's some localized force field thingy. So having a specific ship class be resistant to that is not a big deal, it's just the same thing as some ships being extremely resistant to jamming due to high sensor str.
RuleoftheBone Minmatar Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.03.11 10:43:00 - [65] Edited by: RuleoftheBone on 11/03/2008 10:45:13 Originally by: Arana Tellen Originally by: RuleoftheBone Edited by: RuleoftheBone on 11/03/2008 10:24:50 Edited by: RuleoftheBone on 11/03/2008 10:21:41 Web immunity...bleah. How bout something a little more creative and less immersion killing? "Oh...btw...the new paint on your hull magically allows the web to slide off you without effect". Snore....back to the drawing board please. Surely the devs can do better than the dreaded "Cloak of Haste" . EditIf this web immunity thing goes through...at least change the name as I fail to see how "Boots of Speed" remotely make these ships worthy of the name "Assault". If Eve ever lets RP get too much in the way of propper game balance, it dies. I don't care about RP much beyond immersion. The trouble is in the name. ASSAULT frigate should mean the ability to provide sustained violent firepower at the point of attack with some reasonable chance of survival. Giving some magical web-resist changes the hull to something else entirely. And even with the staggered web resist based on AF level as suggested by CCP any competent Huginn/Rapier pilot should still have no major issue knocking one down. Don't get me wrong...I'd love to fly my Jaguar more often and I'd even buy a new Wolf if these ships could actually assault something beyond frigs/crap-fit/crap-piloted T1 cruisers. Its a hull class begging for a role. And I'm pretty sure fitting 3x720 T2's and an HML on a Wolf would be a LOT of fun with a bit more speed and less mass. With of course similar revisions across racial lines. Global web immunity across the class is boring and a cop-out IMO. I'm sure you clever CCP folks will come up with something though. "Lead Me..Follow Me..Or get the **** out of my way" General George Patton USA
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue Sex Panthers	Posted - 2008.03.11 11:04:00 - [66] AF buffs: reduce mass to T1 frig levels, increase damage bonuses from 5% (nominally) to 7.5% per level, remove fake 4th bonus of resists per level and build that into the base ship stats. Add in 10% web resistance per level, add in 10% sig reduction per level. Do all of the above, and you have some kick ass frigs. They'll still be slow, but they'd be able to tangle with cruisers, and perform better vs. interceptors. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.03.11 11:08:00 - [67] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 11/03/2008 11:15:19 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 11/03/2008 11:12:36 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 11/03/2008 11:09:43 Originally by: Vyktor Abyss Originally by: Cpt Branko LOL @ awesome tanks/cap recharge/etc for frigates ;) Seriously, buy a cruiser sometime and you'll understand what we're trying to tell you. The bloody things are marginally faster then AFs. Which is so balanced given their awesome DPS, tanks over three time the size and so on. AFs first and foremost need to stop handling like flying bricks. Try using (or remember using if your old enough) that same cruiser to tank a 4/10 complex, or tanking a couple of stealth bombers while closing to range with (Lordy me... I must be CRAZY) - an AB!, but oh wait you conveniently forget the sig radius which is the essence of its great tank. PvE tank, therefore moot. NPCs don't web, track horribly and don't fly smart. Real people web you, make you stay at 1-2km range w/out transversal and pop you. Even a rigged-out, etc, etc AB Vengeance won't tank a decently skilled/fit cruiser. At any rate, cruisers have commonly 800/1600 plate fits + resist gear + damage control. Nothing the AF can do can even remotely match the endurance this gives them. If you tanked a couple of stealth bombers, I LOL at them. I mean, OK, I've killed some stealth bombers in a AB rifter, but only because they sucked and engaged at <15km range. Originally by: Vyktor Abyss My opinion is that with web immunity most close range fit AFs like the blaster Ishkur or Vengence would kill, or at least give a close fight to most T1 cruisers that don't have smartbombs or neuts fitted, which considering their relative costs and insurance payouts would make AFs much more worthwhile to fly compared to the T1 cruiser considering the extra price/reduced loss payout. I'd sooner see the ships fixed, but if they can't be bothered to do that and decided to just give them reduced webbing/web immunity, well, it is a major boost. Originally by: Bellum Eternus AF buffs: reduce mass to T1 frig levels, increase damage bonuses from 5% (nominally) to 7.5% per level, remove fake 4th bonus of resists per level and build that into the base ship stats. Add in 10% web resistance per level, add in 10% sig reduction per level. Do all of the above, and you have some kick ass frigs. They'll still be slow, but they'd be able to tangle with cruisers, and perform better vs. interceptors. Awesome ideas, but the sig reduction might be too much really, you already have interceptors for that. A number of these ships also needs more fittings. Hawk needs a general fix, it's just a piece of crap. The fix needs to be bigger then web resist. Web resist is slapping a (very powerful) band aid over ships which are essentially broken. It would make some of the AFs awesome, and some of them (think about the Hawk for instance) would still be a steaming piece of crap. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.11 11:46:00 - [68] Web immunity would definitely be a bad idea. Web resistence around 50% is fairly balanced. Considering the currently useless state of AF, giving them this power won't make them overpowered. The words "web immunity" should be avoided, as that immidiately gives people wrong impression. They certainly not going to get any warp scrambler immunity. Comparing them to supercaps of old days is silly.
ArmyOfMe hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.03.11 11:57:00 - [69] i like the idea of them being somewhat imune to webs, but at the same time i would love to see them not being able to field a mwd then, just give them a slight bonus to ab speed perhaps
Zara Torbe	Posted - 2008.03.11 12:01:00 - [70] Ishkur = my favourit ship, ever! Boost: Acceleration/Agility - reduce mass ?
Arana Tellen Gallente The Blackguard Wolves Black Star Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.11 12:01:00 - [71] Originally by: Ephemeron Web immunity would definitely be a bad idea. Web resistence around 50% is fairly balanced. Considering the currently useless state of AF, giving them this power won't make them overpowered. The words "web immunity" should be avoided, as that immidiately gives people wrong impression. They certainly not going to get any warp scrambler immunity. Comparing them to supercaps of old days is silly. As usual other people used that work, not Zulupark and people run off blaming him. I agree with you that immunity should be avoided, but the web resistance still needs to go hand in hand with other changes (minor tweaks). Also to an above poster the ability to assault is the ability to orbit close, deal high damage and keep enough velocity to avoid fire from larger guns. AT THE SAME TIME, I think EVERYONE wants to avoid AFs MWDing everywhere are being untouchable, to this effect an AB bonus of some kind would help, avoiding putting a penalty on MWDs specifically. --------------------------------- Oh noes! Originally by: CCP Greyscale moderated - mother abuse - Mitnal
Mihailo Great GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.03.11 12:50:00 - [72] Not signed, disagree. We have enough speed boats, this new thing is interesting and will not overpower assault frigates, but will make them more useful than they are currently. Your problem is you expected assault frigates to be super awesome after the "fix". Web immunity is good enough for most of us pvp'ers.
Maaku	Posted - 2008.03.11 12:55:00 - [73] The problem with buffing assault frigates: Add speed and they crowd interceptors. Add gank and they crowd destroyers. Add tank and they crowd cruisers. It seems that AFs are meant to occupy a space between those three other ship classes, but that space may not actually exist, and finding a role for AFs may just simply involve doing something completely different. Something Completely Different: Bonuses for AFs based on the number of other AFs in the same gang/squad and on the same grid. Make them the ultimate wolfpack ship. Mediocre solo, but get ten of them together and they become positively scary. It's not unreasonable in gameworld terms...the ships have special technology that allows them to automatically interoperate and coordinate and allowing the whole to become greater than the sum of its parts. Not sure how hard it would be to implement. An idle thought I just had, likely will be shot down quickly.
Jack Jombardo Amarr	Posted - 2008.03.11 12:57:00 - [74] Just some points that I don't understand about AFs. My punisher is a very nice ship and fun to fly. I trained lot of points to get it's big brothers (Vengeance/Retribution). I got: - better resitences, realy nice :) - a little more armor, nice too - a little more damage from the Retribution but a horible slot layout (one med?? "util"-high for a sniper ship?) - very low damage but great slot layout for the Vengeance (no missile bonus, just rockets?) - a handling like a sitting duck from both :( I just can fly the Amarrian Assaults and I love the Vengeance. Realy competent little spaceboot. But after investing so many points I don't understand why I got penelized with the heavy mass and low aggility :(. Even with it's compareble low damage the Vengeance is very very nice and OK except it's "duckyness". Retribution real needs it's "util-high" moved to a med (same for the Amarrian destroyer btw, one low to one med) please.
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.03.11 13:11:00 - [75] Originally by: Jack Jombardo I just can fly the Amarrian Assaults and I love the Vengeance. Realy competent little spaceboot. But after investing so many points I don't understand why I got penelized with the heavy mass and low aggility :(. I don't get it either. I mean, HACs are in no way penalized like this. No T2 variant is, just Assault Ships. The worst thing is, one of the selling points of T1 frigates is the ability to dodge camps with the preety superb agility they have, and AFs not having that is just a horrible thing for people who like to roam/solo in small ships. Originally by: Jack Jombardo Even with it's compareble low damage the Vengeance is very very nice and OK except it's "duckyness". Retribution real needs it's "util-high" moved to a med (same for the Amarrian destroyer btw, one low to one med) please. Retribution definitely needs a second midslot. Although, all the two-midslot AFs are rather annoying - they have the same amount of mids/lows as T1 frigs. And most of them have horrible fitting (I know both the Wolf and the Enyo are completely horrible in this respect). Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Matrixcvd Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.11 13:17:00 - [76] I have bashed Zulupark for so long, so this bud is for you! I like your idea, surprise surprise. But i hope you are writing down some other tweeks to the concept. 1. Flat out web immunity, would be overpowered, maybe. You first get the idea of huge gangs of AFs flying around as a way of saying uber pwnage swarm. 2. 10% Web immunity, would be underpowered. 3. Using a bonus to velocity only for ABs on AFs and Web resistance higher than 10%, which was suggested earlier, a good idea. 4. My idea, what if you were to make webbifier response on AF's like warp scramble points, say for each AF level above AF 1 gets immunity to 1 web locked on to it, so at level 4 you would need to get webbed by 3 ships. This means, it would take more than a couple frigates/inties to actually web the thing, and then it has a chance to engage those frigs/inties, since you didnt take its web usage away. So what ensues is an actually fight. Needs team work on the other side. As long as they can clearly acheive velocities between interceptors and frigates, above cruisers, but not vagas, this would work i think. I like the AB bonus to velocity to get away from sig rad increase from MWD, (anything going between 1k-3k is not really speed tanking and can be a juicy target due to sig increase on MWD.
Auron Shadowbane Pelennor Swarm Scorched Earth.	Posted - 2008.03.11 13:32:00 - [77] Originally by: Maaku The problem with buffing assault frigates: Add speed and they crowd interceptors. Add gank and they crowd destroyers. Add tank and they crowd cruisers. It seems that AFs are meant to occupy a space between those three other ship classes, but that space may not actually exist, and finding a role for AFs may just simply involve doing something completely different. Something Completely Different: Bonuses for AFs based on the number of other AFs in the same gang/squad and on the same grid. Make them the ultimate wolfpack ship. Mediocre solo, but get ten of them together and they become positively scary. It's not unreasonable in gameworld terms...the ships have special technology that allows them to automatically interoperate and coordinate and allowing the whole to become greater than the sum of its parts. Not sure how hard it would be to implement. An idle thought I just had, likely will be shot down quickly. I really like the final idea but I tihnk the reasoning on top is very flawed. saying a t2 ship isnt allowed to outclass a t1 ship is stupid. hacs outgank, outtank and outrun t1 cruiser (if you take the right one for the job) and recons out-ew them. what cruisers have is cheapness and coming from that adaptability. what I would love to see to fix AF is in-line-ishness of agility & mass as well as more gank. add to that an afterburner fix (who uses them anyway? they cant compete with mwd outside of deadspace) that gives the afterburner itself an inert web-resistance (40% for t1 and 55% for t2 would make them a primarily COUNTER to web instead of a speed mod) and you have a nice frig which can orbit at 1-1.5kms and still goes its 500ms when webbed while doing good damage. together with the allready implemented afterburner skills you ca quite nicely operate even when neuted. for 4th bonus they might get a racials tanking/ganking bonus. like capcaitor/armor resist for amar. shield amounth/recharge caldari. rof/damage for minmatar (just dont give em speed! and yay for tripple damage bonus wolf) and something droney/blasterey for gallente.
Phrixus Zephyr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.11 13:36:00 - [78] Even with 10-50% resistance you'd still need a slight AF speed buff. Go get an AF and fit a standard T2 mwd. They really are too slow.
Ulstan	Posted - 2008.03.11 13:59:00 - [79] Edited by: Ulstan on 11/03/2008 14:04:34 The first fix that AF's need is to handle like frigates. HACS handle better than T1 cruisesr. AF's handle much much much worse than T1 frigates. They're slow flying bricks that get destroyed easily. They are essentially gimped super expensive T1 cruisers. You absolutely cannot have AF's getting outrun by MWD cruisers. If a ship with frigate survivability handles like a cruiser, no one will bother using it. AF's need to be just as capable of jumping through gate camps as standard T1 frigates. Fix their mass and make them handle like frigates, and then we can think about giving them their missing 4th bonus. Oh and fix the Hawk so that it's not in fact, outdamaged by a T1 frigate.
Vyktor Abyss The Abyss Corporation Abyss Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.11 14:07:00 - [80] Got to say that yes, 100% webbing immunity probably would be overpowered meaning battleship weapons tracking would give them little chance without smartbombs, neuts and/or support. A 25% to 50% resistance to webbing however would probably not be overpowered, especially if they were boosted with as someone said earlier an improved targetting range, sensor strength and perhaps slightly better fall offs ( or whatever is needed racially: drone speed bonus for ishkurs etc) giving them a great "ranged anti-support" fleet role as well as improved "heavy tackling" ability. That would certainly make them more worthwhile to fly. On a slight tangent since Zulupark appears to be watching: I have posted previously in the ideas forum in (I think it was) Goumindong's excellent suggestion regarding improvements to webbing mechanics in that it should have ranges and verying strengths reflecting the ship class the module is fitted on, also used against and perhaps also based on sig radius (which would also boost use of ABs for PVP \o/) and veloctity like tracking making the uberquick tackleable and killable, and impacting the already uberslow much less. My opinion is the current webbing mechanics are a little bit overpowered when a T1 frigate can produce enough webbing strength to effectively stop a Battleship, Carrier or even Dreadnaught dead in its tracks. The stasis webifier module is now a must fit module "for all situations" requirement along with the MWD and Scram of virtually all PVP setups currently (except the prevelant immune orbit at 20km at 7km/s nano-crud). These kind of differences for PVP "must have" fittings to PVE fitting really need looking at IMHO. A prime example of broken webbing mechanics IMHO are Nano-Rapiers and Nano-Huginns. They are kind of ridiculous in that currently it takes a Nano-Rapier, Nano-Huginn or blob of tackle to ever get one tackled. Anyway I'll get off my soapbox and let someone else tell me how noob I am because I dont always fly a stabbed BS with neuts when I go ratting or missioning. Err..now back to the AF discussion. ABVSS are recruiting...... Veeeeery Slowly!! Hehe!!
Ulstan	Posted - 2008.03.11 14:07:00 - [81] Quote: AF buffs: reduce mass to T1 frig levels, increase damage bonuses from 5% (nominally) to 7.5% per level, remove fake 4th bonus of resists per level and build that into the base ship stats. Add in 10% web resistance per level, add in 10% sig reduction per level. Do all of the above, and you have some kick ass frigs. They'll still be slow, but they'd be able to tangle with cruisers, and perform better vs. interceptors. I think those ideas are good, except possibly the 10% sig reduction per level one. Seems to be taking on an interceptor role. Maybe replace it with a resistance to neutralizers instead? I feel that assault ships should be capable of getting in and doing their damage - getting webbed and neutralized definitely hampers that. I don't mind the idea of web resistance, if it would make these ships into good T1 cruiser killers. But the mass fix I feel is pretty mandator to lift the class up out of the gutter :p Oh and some specific ship fixes would be needed. See the Hawk. ;)
Ulstan	Posted - 2008.03.11 14:13:00 - [82] Quote: Because there is no cruiser-sized interceptor that a speedy HAC would make pointless, like speedy AFs would make Interceptors pointless. What is this nonsense? Do t1 frigs make interceptors pointless? No. The only thing that would make interceptors pointless are ships that are as fast and get the same tackling bonuses. AF's that are fas fast as T1 frigs don't fulfill either of those criteria.
Mihailo Great GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.03.11 14:14:00 - [83] Originally by: Ulstan Quote: Because there is no cruiser-sized interceptor that a speedy HAC would make pointless, like speedy AFs would make Interceptors pointless. What is this nonsense? Do t1 frigs make interceptors pointless? That's because you're looking at this backwards. Interceptors make t1 frigates pointless.
Phrixus Zephyr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.11 14:16:00 - [84] Originally by: Mihailo Great Originally by: Ulstan Quote: Because there is no cruiser-sized interceptor that a speedy HAC would make pointless, like speedy AFs would make Interceptors pointless. What is this nonsense? Do t1 frigs make interceptors pointless? That's because you're looking at this backwards. Interceptors make t1 frigates pointless. HACs make cruisers pointless, but people still fly them. Whats your point?
ElCoCo KIA Corp KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.11 14:29:00 - [85] Originally by: Azirapheal i like the fact that my 100km pod whipping harpy gets ignored on ops :) Invaluable indeed. All FC's want those podkilling harpies in their gang
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Military Industrial Research	Posted - 2008.03.11 14:42:00 - [86] I think they're pretty decent as they are. But if there is to be a change, all that is needed is to reduce their excessively high mass and they will be great and balanced. Very simple, very easy, and doesn't require reinventing the wheel. Heavy Assault ships have a lot better tanking, more firepower, and in most cases more speed than equivalent tech 1 cruisers. Yet Assault Ships have a lot better tanking, a little bit better firepower, and less speed than equivalent tech 1 frigates. It doesn't make sense.
Arana Tellen Gallente The Blackguard Wolves Black Star Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.11 14:42:00 - [87] Originally by: Matrixcvd I have bashed Zulupark for so long, so this bud is for you! I like your idea, surprise surprise. But i hope you are writing down some other tweeks to the concept. 1. Flat out web immunity, would be overpowered, maybe. You first get the idea of huge gangs of AFs flying around as a way of saying uber pwnage swarm. 2. 10% Web immunity, would be underpowered. 3. Using a bonus to velocity only for ABs on AFs and Web resistance higher than 10%, which was suggested earlier, a good idea. 4. My idea, what if you were to make webbifier response on AF's like warp scramble points, say for each AF level above AF 1 gets immunity to 1 web locked on to it, so at level 4 you would need to get webbed by 3 ships. This means, it would take more than a couple frigates/inties to actually web the thing, and then it has a chance to engage those frigs/inties, since you didnt take its web usage away. So what ensues is an actually fight. Needs team work on the other side. As long as they can clearly acheive velocities between interceptors and frigates, above cruisers, but not vagas, this would work i think. I like the AB bonus to velocity to get away from sig rad increase from MWD, (anything going between 1k-3k is not really speed tanking and can be a juicy target due to sig increase on MWD. AGAIN he never suggested immunity, LTR. --------------------------------- Oh noes! Originally by: CCP Greyscale moderated - mother abuse - Mitnal
Suitonia Gallente interimo	Posted - 2008.03.11 16:22:00 - [88] I think the mass reduction is key to them being more useful. I disagree with the fact that adjusting their mass to their t1 counterparts will make them better or replace interceptors. Can an Incursus go as fast as a taranis? No. So how would an ishkur end up going faster than a taranis, or an enyo even. If there are any imbalances like this they can simply add a small amount of mass onto them once tested to curb their speed from hitting 5km/s+ (If it's even possible?) or whatever the 'limit' should be. It also should be noted that Interceptors have smaller sig radius, higher base speed, higher scan resolution, tackling range bonus on the tackleceptors, and a -80% reduction to scram cap use. Even if an AF is able to reach 'interceptor speeds' then it would cap out reasonable quickly which would make them fail as dedicated tacklers like interceptors, as well as locking slower etc. --- I've always wondered about those Vagabond pilots...
Rik Rels Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.03.11 16:39:00 - [89] LOL wow... Web immunity... That will just be FAR too abusive. That's not a very smart fix for AF's that would just make swarms of them ridiculously powerful.
ghosttr Amarr ARK-CORP SATRAPY	Posted - 2008.03.11 16:40:00 - [90] I think that instead of web immunity i think that the bonus should nullify (or decrease per level as with stealth bombers) the sig radius effect of ab (strictly ab, not mwd). Making their tanks effective against larger ships. Also to make them so they arent dead in the water when confronted with neuts they should have a small capacitor that recharges very quickly. (to overcome the cycle time of the neuts/nos and make the frigate nos effective at keeptin it alive. My Blog

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.