EVE Search - Well, how do we solve the 'Care Bear' security from 'Greifer' issue?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Well, how do we solve the 'Care Bear' security from 'Greifer' issue?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Uilliam Nebel 1st Praetorian Guard Vigilia Valeria	Posted - 2008.03.25 00:17:00 - [1] I know I might get blasted for this. But I honestly feel these are the only (all be it painful, and highly improbable) possible solutions to the question. One: The complete, ôYou bet your life this would happenö solution. (For you folks hell bent on realism.) As people mine less, they refine less. The Empire's tax revenues fall, and only get worse if they try to institute new taxes. Their industry falters as well as there is less demand for goods, given the increase in price beyond a 'fair' market value for them along with a crippling resource shortage. Governments, no matter how democratic, are still like the human animals whom formed them. They are self-preservation minded first. And the easiest way to achieve that is kill what threatens you, and suffer no competition. Seeing they are surrounded by massive 'pirate' factions bigger then the Empires, the four Empires actually agree on one thing finally, the complete 'pacification' of Low Sec and 0.0 space. This basically means the complete smashing of any large military force anywhere near their borders, or forces who engage in raids that affect their trade routes, mining spots, and economies. Reason it would happen, you attack a governments ability to generate, levy, and collect taxes, and you might as well put a sign around your neck that says ôKill me, please.ö Given the Eve back story, the Empires would not even think twice to the use of unrestricted warfare and weapons of mass destruction on any force that threatens them. (We are talking Curtis V. LeMay fire bombing campaign tactics here folks.) It is hard enough to balance things out between them since they have fallen in a stalemate, so a sixth force to contend with is one force too many. And for a historical example, look what happened to the real pirate fractions of history past when they have crossed the line from political nuisance and organized crime, to affecting the state's bottom line. (As a fun experiment to prove my point, stop paying taxes. In fact, go ahead and loudly flaunt the point. Then marvel as you spend next twenty five years in prison watching people who actually murdered someone get paroled before you do.) Two: The ôYou are taking the loss of imaginary things to seriouslyö solution. The title says it all. And it is pretty much what we have now. Three: The ôEveryone plays the game different, so I need to learn to accept that. And do something for myself, and those around meö solution. Truth is, there is no good solution here. The people who gank are not necessarily greifers. They are people who are playing the game in the open play style that CCP obviously intended when they designed it. Can it be out of hand, absolutely, most certainly. But that is the whole point of freedom of choice, things can get out of hand, but because enough people choose it to be. I'm sad to say this, but your only real solution is to look at your own freedom of choice here. And granted, it is an extremely hard one. You either walk on Eve, because you do not want to engage in a game that requires a player to engage in PvP and competition at some level when necessary. Or you do what people who have found themselves unjustly attacked and oppressed by a relative minority have done for centuries in human societies. You stop being lone sheep, and you get a wolf pack sense to go tear out the heart from those who are no where near the number of you and your fellow oppressed. And maybe when it becomes too expensive and unsafe for 'greifers' to gank and gate camp, or their leadership says enough and does internal policing for the sake of self preservation in Eve, you will have won that security you feel is lacking, and also a bit of respect. / "Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in getting up every time we do." - Confucius, Chinese philosopher & reformer (551 BC - 479 BC.)
Uilliam Nebel 1st Praetorian Guard Vigilia Valeria	Posted - 2008.03.25 00:18:00 - [2] Yes, it is unfair, it is unjust to have a choice like this put on you when you want to just enjoy a game and play as a miner or an industrialist. But that is a part of life, which is one thing I feel Eve has captured completely and brilliantly. So before you demand CCP to make a choice for all of us on how to handle this, stop for a second and reflect on if you have made those choices you have been and still are free to make yourself. ôWhat can I do for me?ö ôWhat can I do to help that other guy whom is just trying to get along like me also?ö ôWhat have I done to earn my security today?ö / "Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in getting up every time we do." - Confucius, Chinese philosopher & reformer (551 BC - 479 BC.)
Elysa Madou Republic University	Posted - 2008.03.25 01:43:00 - [3] The nature of the game is unjust? Theres plenty of games where you can just carebear about, doing your mining or crafting and making a profit with no worry of PVP. Why, then, would you choose EVE if you're so averse to the chance you might be attacked? I'm very curious about this. You do not see PVPers joining PVE games and begging for a way to attack people.. but you see the opposite, people joining PVP and then complaining that they are not safe. Why is it ok for one side to expect the other to change for them?
Kahega Amielden Legacy Syndicate space weaponry and trade	Posted - 2008.03.25 01:46:00 - [4] Quote: The nature of the game is unjust? Theres plenty of games where you can just carebear about, doing your mining or crafting and making a profit with no worry of PVP. **, you can do that in EVE. Mine in an osprey. **, you can even mine in a covetor and fully insure it, losing next to nothing if it gets popped.
Elysa Madou Republic University	Posted - 2008.03.25 01:48:00 - [5] Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: The nature of the game is unjust? Theres plenty of games where you can just carebear about, doing your mining or crafting and making a profit with no worry of PVP. **, you can do that in EVE. Mine in an osprey. **, you can even mine in a covetor and fully insure it, losing next to nothing if it gets popped. Further proving my point.
Kahega Amielden Legacy Syndicate space weaponry and trade	Posted - 2008.03.25 01:49:00 - [6] I think there is a legitimate balance issue in that hulks -are- a bit too easy to pop for 100 mil ships...but this has more to do with it making them difficult to defend in lowsec/0.0.
Doc Fury Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.03.25 01:54:00 - [7] Simply allow kill rights to be sold and/or traded. This solves the "suicide gank" problem without nerfing or boosting anybody or anything.
Elysa Madou Republic University	Posted - 2008.03.25 01:55:00 - [8] Edited by: Elysa Madou on 25/03/2008 01:56:24 I disagree. A hulk can be fitted to tank 0.0 rats while mining.. it's expensive, but it can be done. To survive a suicide gank you only have to survive until concord gets there. If you don't fit a tank, it's your own risk/fault. They're not combat ships, but they're not made of glass either. I was playing with EFT, and made a passive shield tank on a Badger II. It could tank 400 DPS with quite a bit of buffer HP. (I think something like 6-8k shields). Mind you, it was t2 fitted and rigged, but it just shows that if you put the effort in you can protect your assets from suicide ganks. Some people don't put in the effort, or get too much against them at once. If 7 people jump you in a belt to suicide gank you, irrelevant to cost.. well, you're just out of luck. The way it is now you'd be safer mining in 0.0 than empire, at least when suicide gankers are around. At least there you see them coming, and likely have people watching your back.. or you can shoot first before they get to you. Even if they're about to suicide you in empire (the game can't tell) so concord is going to shoot you. Edit: Quote: Simply allow kill rights to be sold and/or traded. This solves the "suicide gank" problem without nerfing or boosting anybody or anything. Agree. But you can also hunt them down yourself... unless you have no combat skills or combat ships. In which case, it's your own fault, really.
Esmenet Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.03.25 01:56:00 - [9] Originally by: Elysa Madou You do not see PVPers joining PVE games and begging for a way to attack people.. but you see the opposite, people joining PVP and then complaining that they are not safe. Apparently this type of people are so much more mature than the pvp'ers so they take the "mature" response of whining until mommy (CCP) gives them what they want.
Elysa Madou Republic University	Posted - 2008.03.25 02:01:00 - [10] Originally by: Esmenet Edited by: Esmenet on 25/03/2008 01:56:46 Originally by: Elysa Madou You do not see PVPers joining PVE games and begging for a way to attack people.. but you see the opposite, people joining PVP and then complaining that they are not safe. Apparently this type of people are so much more mature than the pvp'ers so they take the "mature" response of whining until they get what they want. The mature and moral high ground of "PVPers are just sociopaths who want to cause us misery, while were the hard working people just trying to peacefully enjoy ourselves.". And if you make a valid point about how you just enjoy the difficulty, or spend more time playing and want to enjoy it too.. out come the clever "mom's basement" style insults. Because hardcore gamers have no lives, or friends, and have never seen women. (Even female hardcore gamers are invisible to themselves. A recent study proved this.) Stereotypical behavior of this type is to insult the person who disagrees with you, but somehow take the moral high ground because your insults are against their inferiority: you must be better, and are pointing out how foolish they are! It's sort of like politicians debating, really.
Doc Fury Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.03.25 02:13:00 - [11] Originally by: Elysa Madou [ Quote: Simply allow kill rights to be sold and/or traded. This solves the "suicide gank" problem without nerfing or boosting anybody or anything. Agree. But you can also hunt them down yourself... unless you have no combat skills or combat ships. In which case, it's your own fault, really. Not if you've chosen to play the game purely as an industrialist, which should absolutely be anyone's right just like so many so-called PVPers find it beneath them to mine or build stuff and therefore won't train mining/refining/manufacturing. The miners are getting ganked simply because there aren't adequate repercussions beyond CONCORD blowing up their fully insured ship. Sure, a miner gets the kill rights afterwards, but that is about as useful to a miner/industrialist as handing a Pirate/PVPer a free shovel and then pointing them to the nearest asteroid belt would be. FYI, I am not an industrialist, but I can recognize an imbalance when I see one.
Esmenet Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.03.25 02:17:00 - [12] Edited by: Esmenet on 25/03/2008 02:17:17 Originally by: Doc Fury Simply allow kill rights to be sold and/or traded. This solves the "suicide gank" problem without nerfing or boosting anybody or anything. I seem to remember a dev mentioning something like this when talking about reworking the bounty system to make bounty hunting more viable. Would be a good addition to the game.
Elysa Madou Republic University	Posted - 2008.03.25 02:21:00 - [13] Edited by: Elysa Madou on 25/03/2008 02:22:04 Originally by: Doc Fury Originally by: Elysa Madou [ Quote: Simply allow kill rights to be sold and/or traded. This solves the "suicide gank" problem without nerfing or boosting anybody or anything. Agree. But you can also hunt them down yourself... unless you have no combat skills or combat ships. In which case, it's your own fault, really. Not if you've chosen to play the game purely as an industrialist, which should absolutely be anyone's right just like so many so-called PVPers find it beneath them to mine or build stuff and therefore won't train mining/refining/manufacturing. The miners are getting ganked simply because there aren't adequate repercussions beyond CONCORD blowing up their fully insured ship. Sure, a miner gets the kill rights afterwards, but that is about as useful to a miner/industrialist as handing a Pirate/PVPer a free shovel and then pointing them to the nearest asteroid belt would be. FYI, I am not an industrialist, but I can recognize an imbalance when I see one. No one said you don't have the right to play purely as an industrialist. But, that's again, your own choice and not a broken or imbalanced bit of gameplay. If you choose not to train your combat skills and learn to fight, you also choose to be unable to fight when the time comes. So wheres the imbalance? Frankly, if a pure miner with no combat skills can defend themself just as well as a 30M SP pilot because they have the NPCs coming to save the day, that would be imbalanced. What you're saying is, in effect, that everyone has the right to play how they want while being equally capable of defense/revenge. It's not the case. If you really want revenge, hire someone to gank them, and pay a set bounty for every corpse of theirs they bring you. Don't use the bounty office and let them pod themselves, go talk to those scary people with the skulls by their names who hang out in those systems no one goes to because they're scared of the scary people with the skulls by their names. Or empire wardec corps. I'm sure they'd get your revenge for you if the price is right. (Edit: Spelling.)
Lady Karma State War Academy	Posted - 2008.03.25 02:26:00 - [14] Originally by: Doc Fury Simply allow kill rights to be sold and/or traded. This solves the "suicide gank" problem without nerfing or boosting anybody or anything. As stated in another thread, most of the hulks ganked tend to have their drones out on auto aggress. The ganker take a smaller sec hit when the hulk pops, and the hulk does not get kill rights If the hulk pilot was to something as crazy as "paying attention" and only launch drones when there are rats in belt. He would get kill rights
Tyria Sharken TalCorp Enterprises	Posted - 2008.03.25 03:01:00 - [15] the only real way to solve the 'security' issue is 2 things. 1) make any player combat in 0.5 or higher impossible unless: a) There is a war dec in effect. b) they commit a non-combat criminal action (i.e. stealing from a loot wreck) or 2) Make all systems in eve 0.0 and just let it be known as a full time pvp game with no secruity at all (face it, thats how it is now.. concord is a joke) And let the chaos insue. --------------------------------------------- "Only two great species on this planet take part in massive, organized warfare. Men, and ants."
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.03.25 03:09:00 - [16] Nerf Concord. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Letouk Mernel Blue Shell Corporation	Posted - 2008.03.25 03:10:00 - [17] Nah, there are grades to what they can do. A 10% buff to the base defenses of the Hulk and/or haulers will switch the suicide ganking balance upwards, where it now takes a more expensive ship to gank, thus perhaps making it not worth attempting. Thus you can carry 50 million in your hauler instead of just 10 to be a "profitable hit". ETC. They can also get rid of the insurance. This will also shift the balance. There are many things they can do. They've been discussed already.
Uilliam Nebel 1st Praetorian Guard Vigilia Valeria	Posted - 2008.03.25 03:12:00 - [18] Originally by: Elysa Madou The nature of the game is unjust? Theres plenty of games where you can just carebear about, doing your mining or crafting and making a profit with no worry of PVP. Why, then, would you choose EVE if you're so averse to the chance you might be attacked? I'm very curious about this. You do not see PVPers joining PVE games and begging for a way to attack people.. but you see the opposite, people joining PVP and then complaining that they are not safe. Why is it ok for one side to expect the other to change for them? I'm saying if you want the one side to change, you have to force them to by actually doing something more then asking CCP to do it for you. Basically asserting their right to 'greif" those they see as "greifers" and to organize a mutual defense effort. / "Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in getting up every time we do." - Confucius, Chinese philosopher & reformer (551 BC - 479 BC.)
Letouk Mernel Blue Shell Corporation	Posted - 2008.03.25 03:15:00 - [19] Do you know how pointless that is?
Tyria Sharken TalCorp Enterprises	Posted - 2008.03.25 03:16:00 - [20] Originally by: Cpt Branko Nerf Concord. Concord is already nerfed, do it anymore and might as well remove them from the game. oh and i just thought of something.. A simple solution taht dosnt require any 'changes' to the insurance program.. except for 1 small one (dont know alot about codeing, but im sure this would be margionaly easy to impliment) Make any and all insurance taken out on a ship null and void at the first 'illegal' attack. (i.e. if you insure a cruiser you payed and set up for 7m.. and have insured for 30m... and you go and pop a smart-bomb off next to a miner in 0.8 space.. rather than getting your nice 30m payout from the insurance department you get a letter in the eve-mail sayign something along the effect of "were sorry but records show that your ship was lost due to a criminal act you commited, therefor your insurance payout has been witheld, have a nice day) That in itself would, while not fully getting rid of, would definantly put a dent in how many suicide 'ganks' happen. --------------------------------------------- "Only two great species on this planet take part in massive, organized warfare. Men, and ants."
Doc Fury Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.03.25 03:37:00 - [21] Originally by: Elysa Madou No one said you don't have the right to play purely as an industrialist. But, that's again, your own choice and not a broken or imbalanced bit of gameplay. If you choose not to train your combat skills and learn to fight, you also choose to be unable to fight when the time comes. So wheres the imbalance? Frankly, if a pure miner with no combat skills can defend themself just as well as a 30M SP pilot because they have the NPCs coming to save the day, that would be imbalanced. What you're saying is, in effect, that everyone has the right to play how they want while being equally capable of defense/revenge. It's not the case. If you really want revenge, hire someone to gank them, and pay a set bounty for every corpse of theirs they bring you. Don't use the bounty office and let them pod themselves, go talk to those scary people with the skulls by their names who hang out in those systems no one goes to because they're scared of the scary people with the skulls by their names. Or empire wardec corps. I'm sure they'd get your revenge for you if the price is right. The imbalance is purely in cost consequences, and even more so if we followed your suggestion. You are suggesting that miners hire expensive Mercs for after-the-fact retaliation, but why not just allow anyone to sell a bounty hunter their kill rights after-the-fact? The only real difference is that in your suggestion it costs the miner even more than the unrecoverable 100mil isk they just lost and in my suggestion the miner makes back a bit of of the 100+mil they just lost, with the added bonus that the Bounty hunter might get to kill a ganker. PVPers are always moaning they cannot get decent 1 vs. 1's selling the kill rights solves that problem too. Also, have you personally ever hired a Merc for an assassination like you are suggesting? I didn't think so.. Try it sometime and see if you still think it is such a good idea. A paid wardec would have worked pre-privateers, but that's not an option anymore once again due to costs. Messing with the insurance payout seems to be the solution for many, but that even further complicates everything and imho is not a viable solution even if it does not make sense that a criminal gets to receive insurance as a result of the commission of a crime. The consequences for suicide ganking an exhumer are insufficient as it costs the ganker almost nothing isk-wise to continue to play the game this way. Being able to sell kill rights adds real consequences back to the equation. If the advocates of leaving the current system as-is only want to drive people away from the game who don't want to pew-pew, please just come out just say that. The present system is already helping that happen, and maybe it will eventually decrease the lag. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and you can find them, maybe you can sell your kill rights to..
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.03.25 03:41:00 - [22] Originally by: Tyria Sharken Concord is already nerfed, do it anymore and might as well remove them from the game. Concord, at a time, used to be tankable NPC rats. In its current form it's vastly overpowered, and it needs a heavy nerf so you can actually kill people in high-sec without losing your ship. Seriously. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Tyria Sharken TalCorp Enterprises	Posted - 2008.03.25 03:49:00 - [23] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Tyria Sharken Concord is already nerfed, do it anymore and might as well remove them from the game. Concord, at a time, used to be tankable NPC rats. In its current form it's vastly overpowered, and it needs a heavy nerf so you can actually kill people in high-sec without losing your ship. Seriously. lol you have no idea how pointless that comment is do ya? =P so you lose your ship.. if your serious about 'ganking' people in high sec, then your smart enough to be part of a corp that builds its own suiside ships and suicide weapons, insures it for platinum insurances and actualy makes more money than it spent in return when the ship is poped by concord. --------------------------------------------- "Only two great species on this planet take part in massive, organized warfare. Men, and ants."
Riho	Posted - 2008.03.25 06:32:00 - [24] Originally by: Kahega Amielden I think there is a legitimate balance issue in that hulks -are- a bit too easy to pop for 100 mil ships...but this has more to do with it making them difficult to defend in lowsec/0.0. they are mining ships.. not tanking gods like BS or hacs or commands or whatever other command ships. you have friends for that.. if you cant figure out how to defend your barge from suicide ganks then... good luck buying another one ---------------------------------- This is Me, fighting stupidity one post at a time. PS: There are no computer BUGs, there is stuff called "Random Features"
Venkul Mul	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:03:00 - [25] Originally by: Elysa Madou I disagree. A hulk can be fitted to tank 0.0 rats while mining.. it's expensive, but it can be done. To survive a suicide gank you only have to survive until concord gets there. If you don't fit a tank, it's your own risk/fault. They're not combat ships, but they're not made of glass either. I was playing with EFT, and made a passive shield tank on a Badger II. It could tank 400 DPS with quite a bit of buffer HP. (I think something like 6-8k shields). Mind you, it was t2 fitted and rigged, but it just shows that if you put the effort in you can protect your assets from suicide ganks. Your 400 DPs Badger or 0.0 tanked hulk will not survive a suicide ganker. Your tanks are for endurance and relative low DPS, a suicide ganekr will go for high DPS for a very short time. It is possible to tank hulks and transport ships so that they have a passable chance to survive a not so good ganker, but the only efficient system against a group of gankers is to avoid to be the target, so fast aligning and entering warp, not something a hulk dan do.
Venkul Mul Vikramaditya DO JAJA Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:09:00 - [26] Originally by: Elysa Madou Originally by: Esmenet Edited by: Esmenet on 25/03/2008 01:56:46 Originally by: Elysa Madou You do not see PVPers joining PVE games and begging for a way to attack people.. but you see the opposite, people joining PVP and then complaining that they are not safe. Apparently this type of people are so much more mature than the pvp'ers so they take the "mature" response of whining until they get what they want. The mature and moral high ground of "PVPers are just sociopaths who want to cause us misery, while were the hard working people just trying to peacefully enjoy ourselves.". And if you make a valid point about how you just enjoy the difficulty, or spend more time playing and want to enjoy it too.. out come the clever "mom's basement" style insults. Because hardcore gamers have no lives, or friends, and have never seen women. (Even female hardcore gamers are invisible to themselves. A recent study proved this.) Stereotypical behavior of this type is to insult the person who disagrees with you, but somehow take the moral high ground because your insults are against their inferiority: you must be better, and are pointing out how foolish they are! It's sort of like politicians debating, really. Sorry, but you are speaking of PvPers or PvErs? As both use the same tactics of insults, false moral high ground ("I take risks ganking noobships and miners" for gankers), sense of superiority in the play stile they follow, bogus pseudo psychological explanation in behavior and so on. Re-read your post and you will see that you are doing exactly what you accuse other to do: using stereotypes to justify your choice.
Gamesguy D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:31:00 - [27] Originally by: Uilliam Nebel I'm saying if you want the one side to change, you have to force them to by actually doing something more then asking CCP to do it for you. Basically asserting their right to 'greif" those they see as "greifers" and to organize a mutual defense effort. Except the basis of your OP is flawed. Miners do not generate revenue for the various NPC corps/empires. Think about it, you paid tax when you bought your ship and equipment for your ship. Then you mined, and with standings there is basically no refining tax. The suicide ganker comes in, he pays taxes on his ship and equipment on his ship, he suicide ganks you so both of you end up buying new ships and new equipment. Plus the faction gets to tax the modules you originally bought again because the suicide ganker looted your wreck and sold them. From an npc faction's perspective, suicide ganking miners is highly profitable for them, they wouldn't life one finger to help you. Concord is already more protection than you should get.
Shintai	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:43:00 - [28] I dont know if the people just whining with WAAH WAAH WAAAH tank your Hulk actually got a clue? How is it again you tank it when 2 BS or 4 CR/BC attacks you? Just hang in there till concord comes? LOL.... Abstraction and Transcendence: Nature, Shintai, and Geometry
Shevar A.W.M Soul of Fountain	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:59:00 - [29] Originally by: Tyria Sharken Edited by: Tyria Sharken on 25/03/2008 03:17:18 Originally by: Cpt Branko Nerf Concord. Concord is already nerfed, do it anymore and might as well remove them from the game. Ok what nerfs did Concord get? All I remember in my years of playing is buff after buff after buff for concord. --- -The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs
Usagi Tsukino Stimulus	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:59:00 - [30] Originally by: Tyria Sharken Make this voiding of insurance only happen if a criminal act occurs in 0.5 or higher space.. leave 0.4 and below alone. Why? What's the difference between a criminal act in high sec and one in low sec, other than the latter does not generate a CONCORD response? Both generate a security status hit. Both have to deal with sentry guns. You talk about balance, yet you tilt the game towards the high sec players. Originally by: Riho they are mining ships.. not tanking gods like BS or hacs or commands or whatever other command ships. you have friends for that.. if you cant figure out how to defend your barge from suicide ganks then... good luck buying another one Amen. One corp mate in a Domi or Osprey or really any logicistics type ship with some shield remote shield reppers and repper drones can easily assist a tanked Hulk long enough for CONCORD to do its thing. There are other tactics as well. Don't mine in line with another object. Make it so you can't be warped in on top of. If someone starts coming near you, GTFO. Set the Goons to -10, so when they come into local, you'll know. Changing game mechanics is not the answer. Of course, if you're alt-tabbed watching last nights American Idol, you get what's coming to you. --- Usagi Tsukino // Revolutionary Stimulus

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.