EVE Search - why is ORE so backwards?

All Channels

Science and Industry

why is ORE so backwards?

» 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)
mitalla oreaki	Posted - 2008.04.03 18:53:00 - [1] The ORE corporation in EVE is as far as I can tell the most backward corporation in all of EVE. Every race has been working on developing ships to meet the goals and designs of those that fly the ships. To this extent we have frigates , destroyers , cruisers , battlecruisers , and battleships. Then each and every military has developed Tech 2 versions of these ships to fill very specific roles in combat sitchuations. Why has ORE failed to even come close to these basic design concepts? Why does ORE continue to completely ignore the customers needs? we have 3 basic mining barges that are basically cruiser or battlecruiser sized and priced. All of their stats fall into this range. Then we have our Tech 2 versions which are designed to fill a specific role (mercox, ice, general use). What we are failing at seeing is the larger ships that should be available. People are asking for ships with much mroe functionality out of them then the typical barges and exhumers are capable of. what we need are 2 new barges and 2 new exhumers. These should be based on Battleship sized hulls. We are looking at 1 barge that is specifically designed for yield and one that is designed for cargo. the exhumers should naturally follow the same mold but be able to handle a better tank. Following that we should be looking at capital class mining ships. these ships SHOULD have a similar impact on the economy of a corp that a capital ship has on the military might of a corp. combining the massive yield and cargo capabilities of the battleship sized miners. This should also be available in 2 sizes the way the carrier and mothership are. I will make an honorable mention in that the mining lasers and our boosters are reasonably well set up. Another thing that ORE should be working on is more mining drones. fitting into the medium , heavy , and sentry sizes. -------------------------------- From any and all sources I can think of both as real life examples and from science fiction the sheer size and durabilty of mining gear would make it so that small (anything smaller then a battleship) would barely effect them. from a standpoint of reality a miner would never go out to mine without the knowledge that he cold protect himself and thus carry and outfit weaponry enough to deal with what would be small bands of roaming pirates. I feel our biggest issue is that miners have been basically stuck flying cruisers while the rest of eve moved on to bigger and meaner ships.
Ki Anna Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2008.04.03 18:59:00 - [2] So how much yield/cargo should these new ships have? What effects would this have on game balance?
Pwett QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony	Posted - 2008.04.03 19:01:00 - [3] Because ERO just wouldn't make sense! _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony
mitalla oreaki	Posted - 2008.04.03 19:17:00 - [4] It would have very little impact on game balance. The sum of all the minerals have a set average value that is controlled by CCP via insurance. All that changes is the ore values in comparison to each other. The comparison values are based on availability and location. Is it easier to get in empire or in Alliance territory. increasing the YIELD will only lead to more ships being available for combat, it will not result in lower prices on those ships or lower mineral prices. increasing CARGO has a very similar effect to increasing YIELD in that it increases the total amount of ore that can be brought in per hour. The decision of YIELD vs CARGO is more a decision based on weather the miner is grouped or not and were he is located. The biggest thing these changes would allow for is 2 new skills for battleship sized craft. a new skill for capital sized craft and 3 new drone skills. This also allows for miners to have ships that are valued at over 100 mil which is ballpark the price of a hulk. You could have the Battleship sized craft at around 120 mi. and the T2 version around 800 mil and comparable to a marauder. the capital miners would be expected to be in the 2-3 bil and 40 bil ranges. sadly as it stands currently most of a miners expenses are in modules for his ship that can run to 10x the cost of the ship itself.
Ki Anna	Posted - 2008.04.03 19:54:00 - [5] Edited by: Ki Anna on 03/04/2008 19:54:37 So how much more yield/cargo should these ships have than a Hulk?
Euryome	Posted - 2008.04.03 20:04:00 - [6] having bigger cargo size vessels with bigger tanks is a step in the right direction but not more yield and the reason is simple the prices will fall cos when there is more of something readily available on the market it gets cheaper as people undercut each other trying to sell there stuff be it ore or ships or modules the industrialists get little love in eve as it is, so set smaller goals, after talking to devs at fanfest there is very few of them, that have got any time for industrialists the focus is on making pvp better and less blobby, miners and the like come some were after making the jove appear in the game i love mining it needs some tweeks but is not hedioulsy broken like other aspects of the game, i don't want it made easy like in other games why should everyone do it and make it not worthwhile for the dedicated few who enjoy the industrial life i agree with a lot of what your saying btw so don't take this as a trolling post
mitalla oreaki 54th Knights Templar THORN Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.03 21:22:00 - [7] The part about more minerals being introduced will lead to lower prices is a complete and total falsehood. If EVE was a true open market that would be true. However its not , CCP controls the prices of minerals to a very strong degree. prices on minerals as a whole cannot fall due to the insurance. if the prices were to do as you say then it would be more profitable to just build ships and blow them up for the insurance. -- the insurance sets a minimum price on a ship -- the ship value sets a minimum price on the total of the minerals used This is the reason that increasing yield will do nothing other then increasing the amount of ships and possibly bringing the ship prices closer to insurance amounts. as to the increase in yield , thats something that needs to be playtested.
mitalla oreaki	Posted - 2008.04.03 21:51:00 - [8] ok, lets look at yield then for a minute... -- a typical cruiser has 5-6 high power slots for weapons -- a typical battleship has 8 high power slots for weapons. --large guns typically do double the damage of medium guns have a longer range but a slower tracking speed. so in relation to a mining barge this would be like adding a 4th high power slot for a strip miner (the 25% increase we see based on slots jumping from 6 to 8) in addition to that we should see around double the yield an increase in range (50% should be about right to make it 22km) and a longer cycle time.) *for the cycle times to function accordingly they should be modified so that you cant restart them after aborting a cycle until that cycle would normally have finished. aka forcing it to finish even if you cut it out* this compensates for the increase in firepower that you would normally expect from a jump from cruiser to battleship. the biggest overall change that should happen with these ships is that they should be able to hull tank for periods of time. hull repairing and tanking is by far the worst way to go in pvp , however as freighters have shown and as logic would dictate large object designed for industrial use should be able to take a large amount of damage. this would give a miner a further choice of yield (mining upgrade), cargo , or damage control. This is obviously not intended to be a preferred method of tanking npcs due to how poorly a hull repair system works , but would hopefully allow a miner to survive long enough for the guards that are with him to deal with any aggressors as to the bit about the cargo amount increase. thats extremely hard to say as it also infringes on the fact that industrials and transports have the same issues in their lack of a battleship size ship currently.
Helen	Posted - 2008.04.03 22:08:00 - [9] sorry you failed when you started comparing mining barges to battleships/battlecruisers. Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Ki Anna	Posted - 2008.04.03 22:20:00 - [10] Increasing yield has one of two possible effects: which one depends on where mineral prices are in relation to insurance payouts. 1 - It drops mineral prices: which is bad because it decreases the comparitive effectiveness of lower yield ships used by newer players, while leaving the top-end miners with the same effective ISK per hour income. This first effect requires that mineral prices be floating above the hard point set by low end minerals found in hi-sec. Currently I believe that mineral prices are above the minimum set by insurance payouts, but this has not always, nor will it always be the case. Should mineral prices bottom out at the insurance payout price, another effect would present itself. 2 - Increased yield devalues ISK directly: because minerals can be converted directly into ISK through insurance payouts, further increases in mining yield would devalue ISK in general. In reality, the effect of an increased yield for top of the line mining ships would result in a combination of both effects, and both of these lead to a cycle of ever increasing demand for greater mining yield. When the Rorqual was designed, it was specificly designed so that mining yield was not significantly increased. The Dev's have shown that they do not want to significantly increase mining yields. Just like the solution to better combat ships is not more damage, the solution to better mining ships is not more yield. While it may be good to introduce new mining ships, you will have a very hard time convincing anyone of influence that greater yields and larger cargo holds are needed.
Maor Raor Red. Red Republic	Posted - 2008.04.03 22:31:00 - [11] The hulk Should stay the King of mining as far as Yeild but i do think that an accross the board rethink of all barges (T1 and T2) tanking needs to be done to make them actualy protectable against attackers. Either that or add something to help the Escort do their job... a deployable mining Bubble or romote Warp stab or somthing i dont know what. But im getting side tracked. Hulks should stay the Kings of Ore Yeild. What is missing from the Ore line up is a Hostile teritory miner or Ninja miner if you will. Reduced Yeild for extra surviveablity. Perhaps somthing like this. 3 Highs - 2 strips , 1 utility. 5 Mids - Shield tank + MWD or EW 3 Lows - DCU Nano stab.. w/e Dronebay large enough to carry 2 waves of meds. Seperate Ore cargo hold maybe 10k m3 or some such Base warpcore strenth of +2 Ship bonus to Drone dammage and Hp per lvl Ship bonus to Yeild Per lvl (very small .. maybe %1 per lvl) Make the T2 version a Comand Mining platform No strips .. small cargo hold.. infact .. not a mining ship but a ship made for over seeing mining ops is hostile space and giving of bonuses to miners. Or specificly designed to be the Escort of miners via being the only ship able to fit the New Mining op protecting mod mentiond in the first paragraph. Realy we dont need ships with a higher Yeild.. the Hulk is fine. TBH i would trade in any new mining ships and awsome Mining toys for Larger anchorable cans.. but maybe thats just me
Ki Anna	Posted - 2008.04.03 23:34:00 - [12] Originally by: Maor Raor What is missing from the Ore line up is a Hostile teritory miner or Ninja miner if you will. Reduced Yeild for extra surviveablity. Perhaps somthing like this... This is starting to sound more productive. Ninja mining is a largely lost art. A couple of things that need to be watched for. It would need to be able to operate independantly for extended periods of time without docking and without assistance - ie 1 hour plus. It should NOT be practical to operate AFK for extended periods of time. It should NOT compete with haulers for general capacity. Yield should be profitable, but not competive with the Hulk. An idea along these lines would be a little brother to the Rorqual, with a cost some where around the 500-750 mil mark. Instead of the Rorqual's mining fleet support role, this would have an extended solo/home-away-from-home/ninja role. Make it a jump-drive only ship, so that it would be limited to low/null sec, to limiting AFK / low-risk options, as it is supposed to be a ninja miner. Or if it is able to use gates, limit it to low/null sec anyways (possibly due to empire regulation) so that it does not become a farmer's delight. When nano fitted, it would hopefully have the agility of a battlecruiser or possibly cruiser. Allowing quick warp outs, but still requiring some attention to manuvering. If fitted with a cloak it could hide at a safespot if needed. Give it the ability to haul ~120,000 m3 of uncompressed ore so that it could operate for an hour or two on its own. Further giving it this ability in the form of an ore-only hanger could limit its ability to compete as a low cost alternative hauler, while still allowing it to hold a substancial load of ore. If ore needed to be moved to the hanger from the cargo hold manually, it would further reduce AFK options, but would increase the risk of RSI: so I have a split opinion there. If the ore hauling capacity were given in the form of ore compression, instead of raw capacity, it would need to be done in such a way that its ninja mining role is not comprimised. Possibly the ability to abort Industrial seige mode at the cost of losing any ore in the compression cycle. As for its mining capacity, instead of lasers or strips, I would say give it a massive bonus to mining drone yield, probably around 150-200% per level. This would give it a mining yield on par with a Retriver or Covetor, but not to the point of a Hulk. The drones would be exposed, and likely lost if the ship needed to flee in a hurry. The drone bay should be large enough to accomadate spares. The possiblity of ore specific drones could make this even more interesting. For tanking, it should be able to safely handle 0.0 rats if fitted with rat specific hardeners. It would need to be possible to switch to combat drones to deal with scambling frigates. Obviously this idea would need to be filled out and balanced properly, but the basic idea of a proper ninja mining ship for use in isolated space for extended periods would certainly be interesting.
Karanth	Posted - 2008.04.04 09:45:00 - [13] That ship would be awesome. Not only that, if it used some of the skills a Rorqual needs, it would be a good midpoint ship. Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. "Current Earth-Destruction Status"
Euryome Absolutely No Retreat Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.04 10:19:00 - [14] yes ccp do control ore upper prices to a certain degree the price of trit for example can't go above 3.6 i think it was, due to refing of shuttles dr e suggested this be removed and some other stuff to make the ore market more competitive and better priced, but lower limits they have little control over as the price of trit a year ago was just over 2 the only reason its gone up is a lot of trit is needed for newer ships and the like, so a hug flood of minerals into the market will simply lower prices and example of this is mercoxit and zydrine they used to be worth huge amounts as not many people mined them when the drone regions were released what happened to zydrine, the market crashed as it was in abundance it took months of complaing before this was recktafied and the price of zydrine slowing went up again, the main probelm for empire miners and newbies is the can flippers so either an enlarged capacity in barges or bigger gsc's maybe, the orca is on the horizon so i wait for anticipation what goodies it will behold for us and may solve some of these problems
Odd Mothball	Posted - 2008.04.04 11:05:00 - [15] Whilst I would love any new mining ship (we've been slow to develop lately, unlike many other professions), I would quite happily settle for a larger can, although I wonder how large they would have to be so we didn't just have a repeat situation of GSC-clogged belts (although they hold more, more people would use the larger cans for convenience), after all, a hulk can easily fill a jet can in less than 20min in an op... ----------------------------------------------- "Numero Deus Impare Gaudet"
Demtalin le'Mercennaire	Posted - 2008.04.04 12:44:00 - [16] Originally by: mitalla oreaki increasing the YIELD will only lead to more ships being available for combat, it will not result in lower prices on those ships or lower mineral prices. I disagree with you on this point. Saying that more combat ships will be avaliable means that the prices of ships will go down, there will be a flood of ships on the market and combat pilots would still be loosing them around about the same rate. So now we have far to many ships on the market for the level of demand, this means the price of minerals will also go down because those minerals wouldn't be used to build ships so there would be huge stockpiles of minerals on the market too. The above will apply to Modules too. Someone in the thread mentions that these lower prices would decrease the returns for new pilots in lower quality ships, while at the same time only allowing the more experienced pilots to get similar levels of income as they do now. -------- Billy Jean is not my lover
Pwett	Posted - 2008.04.04 16:17:00 - [17] Ki, I love your points, all but the idea of ore specific drones. I don't think this would be a viable alternative unless the drone bay was something on the order of 100m3. But, I think what might a viable drone alternative would be the introduction of heavy mining drones, they would be slower, but have a substantially larger yield to fit inline with its role to focus on mining null-sec ores. Maybe a base of ... 80m3 / min? That would put a fully skilled, albeit not rigged, pull of 200m3 / min / drone for the ship. High slots might be able to fit a couple turrets, or a cloak, or even drone link augmentors, but wouldn't have the bonus to fit strip miners. I just love the idea of making it drone based mining so that you can indeed abandon the drones for a quick escape, and it would provide a positive benefit to people probing you out because they would get the extra probe points (I'm largely thinking of this ship as being used in 0.0 gravimetric exploration in hostile territory). _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Moon Dogg	Posted - 2008.04.04 23:02:00 - [18] Yes, I myself am waiting to see what CCP does for mining drones. I would love to see a mining ship be able to carry some heavy miner drones, and for capital-size ships to be able to deploy mining fighters. T'would be awesome! *********************************** "Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me..."
Andorilthor	Posted - 2008.04.04 23:37:00 - [19] This would be very helpful to the interest in the EVE mining Community, like more advancement in ships would make it so much more cool looking and then having a BS sized Mining barge sounds like a dream. But This actually could have a significant effect on the prices of the smaller mining ships like the procuerer which is crap anyway (skipped it). Another thing you said which is well worth getting is the more mining drones. like drones for the BS mining barge could make a difference to your yield and make them much more popular as they would be seen as something with potenial. In other words fantastic idea man. keep them coming
Maor Raor Red. Red Republic	Posted - 2008.04.05 00:20:00 - [20] My main beef with Mining barges as a line of ships to aim for is that they realy are only good for one thing... Mining.. big shock i know. Not only that but they are only good for one aspect of Mining at that. Yeild. Its no small suprise that mining low sec or ninja mineing 0.0 is (for the most part) ignored by miners. Those players who actualy want to mine for a living as oposed to the players who afk mine while the watch tv for "free isks". The reason is that the actual line of Ore ships just dont cater to mining in hostile teritory. Poor tanks and slow as hell. Added to that the fact that ALL mining ships (even non barges) other than the max cargo expanded Hulk require a Hauler to make more profit per hr than lvl 1 missions . While not a problem in safe space once you hit lowsec or hostile 0.0 ... how many Jumps to a nerarest station?... forget about it. Your hauler often suffers the same Poor tank and Slow speed as your miner. and jumping around 0.0 low sec is a great way to get noticed and killed. And remember that 0.0 ores are large.. and inorder to make it worth while going out to ninja mine you would need to be able to bring back quite alot. As much as i would like to see an Ore ship that caters to the Ninja miner i cant help but think that this ship would be out of place in their line up. Perhaps its time Ore got some competition from a rivel NPC corp offering Mining ships with a different focus. Let Ore focus on Yeild and max m3 per hr and let this New corp focus on Surviveablity and logistics. As it stands Stips miners Bpos are available on the open market and yet its only Ore who makes ships that can fit them.... Seems kinda wrong. Adding a new mining ship NPC developer would almost demand 3 basic ships in their line up much like Ore. Id like to see these ships fill the gaps in the Ore line as follows. Teir 1 - Frig sized Non strip miner ship Fast and agile .. with Drone bonuses to mining and a fair sized cargo hold. Teir 2 - a Dual Strip Ninja miner .. tank .. Cargo .. etc Teir 3 - BC sized Mining Comand ship .. stepping stone to the mining capships. Cant help but feel that CCP wont want to mess with the delicate balance of 2 accounts per miner though...
KAELA MENSHA	Posted - 2008.04.05 11:10:00 - [21] Originally by: Euryome having bigger cargo size vessels with bigger tanks is a step in the right direction but not more yield and the reason is simple the prices will fall cos when there is more of something readily available on the market it gets cheaper as people undercut each other trying to sell there stuff be it ore or ships or modules the industrialists get little love in eve as it is, so set smaller goals, after talking to devs at fanfest there is very few of them, that have got any time for industrialists the focus is on making pvp better and less blobby, miners and the like come some were after making the jove appear in the game i love mining it needs some tweeks but is not hedioulsy broken like other aspects of the game, i don't want it made easy like in other games why should everyone do it and make it not worthwhile for the dedicated few who enjoy the industrial life i agree with a lot of what your saying btw so don't take this as a trolling post
KAELA MENSHA	Posted - 2008.04.05 11:11:00 - [22] now isn't that supprising
Asuka Smith	Posted - 2008.04.05 11:42:00 - [23] G-goon thread? No way you can be so stupid as to think that increased supply with consistent demand will not effect the price of minerals...
mitalla oreaki	Posted - 2008.04.06 00:49:00 - [24] people keep asking how I can think that increasing the supply will NOT lower the price of minerals. The answer is simple CCP wont allow it to. -- The sum total of all the minerals used to make a ship can not go under the sum total of the insurance amount. -- As we have seen with the shuttle revamp. shuttles were holding the price of trit down. now that the shuttle issue is removed the price of trit has risen and the prices of all the other minerals have fallen accordingly. this is due to above. I took the myrm as an example when for some solid numbers. The insurance sets this ship at a 28 mil value. So the price will never go below this value. The current prices that i saw in oursalute was 32 mil. Given this the most ANY increase in mineral production could do is lower the price of this ship by 4 mil and then lower the sum total of the minerals used by the same 4 mil. this is roughly a 12% decrease in value. Now this is a theoretical decrease. In fact the actual amount will never hit that point. So to those who say that a huge increase in mineral influx that could bbe cause by a 100% or more increase in mining yield will cripple the market, I have to wonder... is 12% decrease crippling? What I think I would see is an increase in the number of ships that are available to be flown as the sales price approaches is baseline. I implore people to understand that this is NOT in any way an open market. CCP controls many aspects that create upper and lower limits on minerals.
mitalla oreaki	Posted - 2008.04.06 00:53:00 - [25] As to the comments about low sec and alliance mining. this is why I brought up the concept of turning the more advanced and larger mining ships into hull tanks. This would allow for more choices for miners and allow a way to encourage more low sec mining. One of the biggest problems with low sec mining is that even if you have an escort often the miners will be engaged and dead before the escorts can deal with the offending pirates. Allowing a hull tank that forces a miner to sacrifice either Yield or Cargo in order to give the guards time to deal with the pirates would be a nice balance to this.
Asuka Smith	Posted - 2008.04.06 01:01:00 - [26] Edited by: Asuka Smith on 06/04/2008 01:02:15 Insurance is determined by average ship price IIRC... I might be wrong on that but I remember hearing that; and even if I am wrong let me give you a scenario... You increase yield by 100%, there are now twice as many ravens on the market... The demand is not going to magically increase to consume these Ravens so there is just going to be a market glut of everything, dropping the price to fractions of a percent above insurance (assuming insurance is fixed)
Maor Raor Red. Red Republic	Posted - 2008.04.06 07:22:00 - [27] I dont personaly dont think that people would just build twise as many Ravens with the extra Mins they would get form a %100 increase in yeild.. We all know a large amount of the Mins in the game come from reproccesed mission loot. But even if that were not the case Why build 100 if you can only sell 50? Thats just Isk that is sitting in shipform gathering dust. In fact why build at all if your profit is only going to be a fration of a % above insurance cost. Better to just rat What i think you would see is many many more cap ships, outposts and titans in production. Either way.. more ravens, npcers or more Capships .. none would be good for the game. Thats why i dont support any increase in yeild. I do support an increase in mining options via offering Ships that can tank. As it stand now there are only 2 options a mine can realy take. Mine in Empire or join a nutcupping Aliance and mine in 0.0 Niether of which appeal to me. Giving the small groups of miners a real chance to survive and profit in Lowsec will do 3 things. Firstly lower the amout of Empire Mins being mined because some miners will stop mining Empire and mine in Low sec. Seccondly create an actual market in Lowsec.. Miners often build as well. Thirdly .. it will give the much starved Pirates some more targets. Yes they may have to work a little harder to actualy kill a barge than they used to but at least they had the opotunity to try.. Currently If i cut a loud fart near a covetor its likely to asplode.. realy Pirates have had it to easy when it comes to popping barges.
Karanth	Posted - 2008.04.06 07:55:00 - [28] Originally by: Maor Raor My main beef with Mining barges as a line of ships to aim for is that they realy are only good for one thing... Mining.. big shock i know. Not only that but they are only good for one aspect of Mining at that. Yeild. Its no small suprise that mining low sec or ninja mineing 0.0 is (for the most part) ignored by miners. Those players who actualy want to mine for a living as oposed to the players who afk mine while the watch tv for "free isks". The reason is that the actual line of Ore ships just dont cater to mining in hostile teritory. Poor tanks and slow as hell. Added to that the fact that ALL mining ships (even non barges) other than the max cargo expanded Hulk require a Hauler to make more profit per hr than lvl 1 missions . While not a problem in safe space once you hit lowsec or hostile 0.0 ... how many Jumps to a nerarest station?... forget about it. Your hauler often suffers the same Poor tank and Slow speed as your miner. and jumping around 0.0 low sec is a great way to get noticed and killed. And remember that 0.0 ores are large.. and inorder to make it worth while going out to ninja mine you would need to be able to bring back quite alot. As much as i would like to see an Ore ship that caters to the Ninja miner i cant help but think that this ship would be out of place in their line up. Perhaps its time Ore got some competition from a rivel NPC corp offering Mining ships with a different focus. Let Ore focus on Yeild and max m3 per hr and let this New corp focus on Surviveablity and logistics. As it stands Stips miners Bpos are available on the open market and yet its only Ore who makes ships that can fit them.... Seems kinda wrong. Adding a new mining ship NPC developer would almost demand 3 basic ships in their line up much like Ore. Id like to see these ships fill the gaps in the Ore line as follows. Teir 1 - Frig sized Non strip miner ship Fast and agile .. with Drone bonuses to mining and a fair sized cargo hold. Teir 2 - a Dual Strip Ninja miner .. tank .. Cargo .. etc Teir 3 - BC sized Mining Comand ship .. stepping stone to the mining capships. Cant help but feel that CCP wont want to mess with the delicate balance of 2 accounts per miner though... How about a focus on other forms of mining, like Ice or Gas or something else? Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. "Current Earth-Destruction Status"
Maor Raor	Posted - 2008.04.06 08:44:00 - [29] Well Ice is coverd by the Macknaw but there is a case to be made for an ice miner with a a better tank for Lowsec. I dont know enough about Gass mining to say but im guessing that atm Hulks/Covetors are doing the work and by looking at the booster market.. suffering for it. The reason i sugest basic Ore miners for the T1 mythical new NPC corp mining barge is that, personaly, ships designd for something as narrow as Ice or Gass should probly be T2. Better tank and less yeild is a broarder design principal thus good for T1 ships. In the case of gas .. as its oly available in Lowsec 0.0, any ship designed to mine it will need a viable tank. thus i suges the T1 ninja mining/Tanking barges .. then if they ever get T2 versions make them the Gass/other mining ships.
Hehulk Black Sea Industries Insurgency	Posted - 2008.04.06 10:11:00 - [30] Some sort of specialised gas mining ship would be nice. As far as I know, right now the only way to boost gas harvesters is to run gang links. Ship bonuses and such don't effect them, and barges can't mine them ---------- It's great being minmatar, ain't it
Maor Raor Red. Red Republic	Posted - 2008.04.06 10:15:00 - [31] Edited by: Maor Raor on 06/04/2008 10:17:41 Originally by: Hehulk Some sort of specialised gas mining ship would be nice. As far as I know, right now the only way to boost gas harvesters is to run gang links. Ship bonuses and such don't effect them, and barges can't mine them Yikes.. i didnt know that about gas mineing.. in that case a gas mining barge is a must.
Lougra United Forces Industrial	Posted - 2008.04.06 12:16:00 - [32] I didnt bother to read the next posts, but i can honestly say this. We dont need more mining ships. WE NEED BALANCE. It is simply unacceptable, a BC equivalent ship to have 1/6 of the shield/armor/hull without giving something in exchange. It is not acceptable when the mackinaw which is made for ice mining, to be defenceless if you fit it to mine ice. It is simply pathetic when the only thing can fitted is a CIVILIAN SHIELD BOOSTER. You know why goons has started to *****our game? Because hulk has 1600 shield and can be blown too easily. That called Effort. The effort of yours, against the effort of a character which is made within 2008! The money you spend to fit your hulk and the money the noob spend to fit a cruiser. Ir is really pathetic when a vexor blowing up macks in ice fields. Pathetic as this game is started to be. Carebear is the surname that others gives you, if you enjoy to play eve, in other way than the rest want YOU to play it.
Elektrea Happy hOur Mining and industry Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.04.06 18:18:00 - [33] Originally by: mitalla oreaki The part about more minerals being introduced will lead to lower prices is a complete and total falsehood. If EVE was a true open market that would be true. However its not , CCP controls the prices of minerals to a very strong degree. prices on minerals as a whole cannot fall due to the insurance. if the prices were to do as you say then it would be more profitable to just build ships and blow them up for the insurance. -- the insurance sets a minimum price on a ship -- the ship value sets a minimum price on the total of the minerals used This is the reason that increasing yield will do nothing other then increasing the amount of ships and possibly bringing the ship prices closer to insurance amounts. as to the increase in yield , thats something that needs to be playtested. The insurance does not set a minimum. Anyone can build and set it below the mineral cost, theres nothing stopping them? Happy HOur Minning and Industry
Rhatar Khurin Sten Industries	Posted - 2008.04.07 03:18:00 - [34] I would love to see a battleship sized ORE vessel with 4 strip miners and 2 turret slots and 2 misc high slots. _ EVE RELATED CONTENT
Tasko Pal	Posted - 2008.04.07 04:56:00 - [35] Edited by: Tasko Pal on 07/04/2008 04:59:58 I don't see any reason why ORE should make "balanced ships". They are a specialized faction and make focused mining ships and mining equipment (or at least issue the BPOs for such). Period. Let us keep in mind that there are plenty of battleships and battlecruisers with good tanks and capable of fitting mining lasers or gas harvesters. The only ship that really is missing is a high tank ice miner. Originally by: Elektrea The insurance does not set a minimum. Anyone can build and set it below the mineral cost, theres nothing stopping them? Sure, we could sell ravens for 1 isk each. But that's not the debate. In an active market, there will be buyers just below insurance cost for these ships, and one can always build and blow up their own ships. That's going to keep prices from going well below insurance costs.
Maor Raor	Posted - 2008.04.07 05:46:00 - [36] Well there is no reason that Ore has to offer ballanced ships if CCP dont feel that they should. BUT If the aim of the Devs in encourage players to take risk inorder to get better rewards, then offering a mining barge that even has a chance of surviveing an encounter would go a long way to getting the generaly risk adverse empire huggers to venture out into lowsec. And in a way i agree that Ore shouldnt be the one to offer the tanking Barges. The more i think about it the more i think that the next racial BS released by CCP should be a mining BS... chances of that happening.. nill We would do better to ask for a new brand of barge
Jacob Holland	Posted - 2008.04.07 10:16:00 - [37] 4 unbonused strip miners yield just a fraction less than the hulk's bonused strips IIRC. If you were to take an eight highslot layout and give it enough CPU to fit four strip miners (through a CPU reduction bonus) then the question is what could be fitted in the remaining highs... Turrets are out, if you give it turret hardpoints then people will simply fill them with mining lasers, which is not the aim. If we leave them as utility slots then nos, neuts or remote logistics are the primary options, with smartbombs offering the only overtly offensive option. Launcher Hardpoints don't really fit with the very Gallente, drone oriented style which ORE have always exhibited but they do open the option of moderate, long ranged firepower. So what does a mining platform need? Firepower can effectively be drawn from drones, a decent dronebay would be sufficient to remove rats after an op for example. Launchers (with defenders) would improve the tank - but more than a couple of launchers might be too much. So let's leave it at 0 hardpoints, perhaps you aim to fit with a couple of large smartbombs and a couple of large shield transfers. It would need a range bonus on those in that case - so that what you're transferring can sit well outside smartbomb range. Midslots should be sufficient for a decent sized tank, a mining platform would need to be able to tank spawns without resort to deadspace modules. The problem of course now is that both the Mackinaw and the Hulk are at risk of obsolescence... Low slots are tricky - I would have to limit it to a single low, either a mining upgrade or a cargo expander, no outdoing the hulk with extra upgrades. The reason it's difficult is that the CPU has to be sufficient to fit a solid shield and remote shield tank, there's too much risk of highsec miners fitting a substantially substandard tank for more yield. So it needs a tank, both a reasonable buffer and a decent active tank. Ideally it needs to have cap to run remote logistics well as well. If one were to make both of its ship skills logistics based then you would end up with a ship which could be used 1:4 to barges, supporting their tank effectively while tanking itself. With a small enough cargo that management would be important to discourage AFKing but plenty of options otherwise. -- Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. Originally by: cordy Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
Cissnei	Posted - 2008.04.07 10:51:00 - [38] an across the board increase of armor/shield/hull hp of all barges by 50% would be a better starting point than yet ANOTHER ship. or even 100% this would at least make it more difficult for those..what are you calling them now, goons? is that a corp or just a generic name....to be able to alpha strike you dead in a hulk or even a covetor with an inexpensive cruiser, and i think that's the entire point. it's far too easy for these "goons" to alpha strike and one shot people in hulks unless they give up the very point of having a hulk - higher yield - and outfit it with insanely expensive tanks. and even then it can still be one shot by many cruiser setups in a 1.0 belt from what im reading it should be impossible to one-shot kill a hulk with anything less than a battleship's full-turret alpha. everything else should have to take a few rounds from their guns/missiles/lasers to down one (of a moderately equally skilled pilot)
Maor Raor Red. Red Republic	Posted - 2008.04.07 11:26:00 - [39] As much as i think its warrented .. i cant see CCP boosting Barges HP by any %.. let alone %50 or %100.. Definitly not without giving up %50 of the yeild. Personaly id be willing to give that up but im not sure you all would agree with me on that. Give us an Ore BS Balance it via ship bonuses so that it comes in well above the retriever but but below the covetor as far as yeild but alow it to tank like BS Keep shield regen tanking off the table so the AFK cant tank bs belt spawns. 4 Strips is out of the question imo... 7 Highs - no strips *****ble so only 6 mining lazorz + one utility for a cloak or drone thing. 6 mids - belt scanner, + 5 slot active shield tank.. or maybe EW 4 lows - or less if mining up grades are an issue.. (at work so cant do the math atm) or posably Hull tanking.. doable with a massive ship bonus to Hull repping and the correct slot layout I think a Hull tank could fit the RP for a mining BS realy well. All i want is a ship i can take into lowsec that can take the punishment while not giving me carpal tunnel like current BS mining does.
Cissnei Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.04.07 12:23:00 - [40] Edited by: Cissnei on 07/04/2008 12:26:10 that isnt the issue at all they dont care that your hulk has a slightly higher yield than a covetor they care that it's a 100-150 million isk ship with only a 9 million insurance payout, while they very nearly make money from the insurance payout of the ship they lost in the suicide one-shotting of you if they cant one-shot you, so (if you trained for it) you can at least tank them for a bit as they try to kill you giving you a chance to survive while concord kills them - that would go a long way to stopping the complaints - or at least lessening any legitimacy to them of course removing insurance payouts on ships destroyed that were used to instigate a hostile action in 0.5-1.0 space would be another incentive to slow down the whole 'bodies against the wall' thing and do you think an ORE bs would be more or less than that hulk? and you still gotta haul unless you plan to dock frequently - and i mean FREQUENTLY. what you have suggested is pretty much already in the game. having a bs with a mining bonus would just m ean faster jet can mining. that wont stop them from destroying your jet cans, but will create a logistical nightmare as you now have to have another account with a beefy transport ship to haul that can to lessen the risk of loss, or dock everytime your tiny cargohold fills.
Pwett QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony	Posted - 2008.04.07 12:29:00 - [41] Edited by: Pwett on 07/04/2008 12:30:45 Originally by: Asuka Smith Insurance is determined by average ship price IIRC... I might be wrong on that but I remember hearing that Insurance price is determined by an arbitrary 'value' in the ivtTypes table that hasn't changes for three years. Otherwise, the scenario is correct. The only way for there NOT to be a glut is if we were currently mining ALL the available ore in EVE. _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony
Jason Edwards Edwards Inc Zzz	Posted - 2008.04.07 13:35:00 - [42] Not sure about backwards... but ORE basically doesn't invent anything worth anything. Where are the mining rigs? Low grade mining laser extender implants? That's absolutely worthless... 30 days training to get covetor and 12 seconds later you fly the hulk and you ignore the covetor... what needs to be done is to shift covetor skill requirements down. mining barge lvl 4 should be for the covetor. You then have to train about a week minimum to get the covetor. Then another month to get to exhumers. Also of note. I already fly a hulk. Should there be "2 new barges and 2 new exhumers" nahhh. No point and no real place for them.
mitalla oreaki 54th Knights Templar THORN Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.07 14:26:00 - [43] I would like to remind people of another factor that is being missed in this discussion. Thats the SP needed to fly thses ships. These ships are not meant to be ships that your whole corp can jump into to assist in a mining op. These are meant to be ships for a dedicated miner. What I am proposing is... mining BS (rank 7) - requires mining barge and astrogeology 5 advanced BS (rank 9) - requires mining BS and exhumer 5 capital mining laser platform (rank 12) - requires mining BS 5 and varying secondary skills capital mining drone platform (rank 14) - requires mining BS and varying secondary skills. As for the bonus to yield. That should be implemented as a large strip miner and its T2 variant. for 2 more skills that a miner would need to learn in order to use these ships properly. I also proposed more mining drones for the medium, heavy , and sentry sizes. this is another 6 skills for both basic operation and for Tech 2 operation. So for an increase in yield and increase in tank and just all around better use of ships what i am really asking for is that the miner profession not cap out after a few months of training. With skills like these carrying a miner well over a year of dedicated training there SHOULD be an increase in yield and everything else to go with it. How would the combat community feel if all the battleships and capital ships still had the DPS output of a cruiser or battlecruiser even after all that training and investment? Also I hear people talk about other variants. That would be GREAT more T2 versions of exhumers and battleships.examples... -- hulk equivelent. remove mining bonus , add 4th high slot , increase cap and other stats to maintain either a remote rep or a gang mod. add bonuses to allow 1 gang mod. -- BS equivelent. again remove mining bonuses and add 2-3 slots. allow for 1 gang mod and a bonus to rep amount. The economy will adjust with minimal effort in the same way its adjusting to the changes in the LP store and the ability to do level 4 missions. So lets call for some more expensive and skill intensive ships. some more expensive and skill intensive lasers. and some more expensive and skill intensive drones.
Medory Caldari VIRTUAL LIFE VANGUARD Carpe Universitas	Posted - 2008.04.12 10:44:00 - [44] It would be interesting to see a cap sized ORE miner named "Veldnaught" and/or "Chribba" as an homage to one of our hardest working players.
elric gallach	Posted - 2008.04.13 13:12:00 - [45] get a black ops, stick mining lasers on it, and a cloak and go for it
Will Strafe	Posted - 2008.04.13 14:35:00 - [46] I think the problem is that mining is dragging isk out of space and into the game, as the main fuel to the economy of Eve. So increasing mining ships to tech2 and capitals would maybe make the single miner feel more advanced, but overall it would increase the ISK inflow into the galaxe by a huge amount. It doesn't matter as much if two pvp players blow each up in 20 million ISK ships or 1 billion ISK ships. But if miners gained "Capital class mining ships. these ships SHOULD have a similar impact on the economy of a corp that a capital ship has on the military might of a corp." the impact would be felt from the tutorial mission and to the furthest corner of space. And maybe not in a very desirable way for most. The overall ISK flow into the game should probably be, and I guess it is, kept at a steady rate where game developers can monitor fluxuations and plan the game ahead. TechII ninja mining ships that where cloaked or any changes like mentioned above poster would be a nice addition, some sort of gameplay advancement in mining that don't just yield +50%, but lets players utilise new tactics in the warfare of Eve economy.
mitalla oreaki	Posted - 2008.04.13 23:33:00 - [47] there are 2 BIG reasons that ninja mining is not a choice at this time. you need to look at the differences in mining and ratting to see it. 1st - a miner would need to be able to run his 3 strip miners and have a slot of a cloaking device. with the way things are now there is not point using 2 strips and a cloak. 2nd - Cargo. a ratter can carry enough ammo to be out in a belt killing bounty rats for hours and hours. a hulk has to run to a station every 20 mins to empty its cargo hold. in order to make this work any one of a bunch of changes would need to be made.... -- Vastly increase the size of the cargo to allow a miner to mine for hours and hours... but with a good hulk pulling out easily 120k m3 an hour you would need 1.2 mil m3 to make it viable... sadly this is into the capital ship range. -- you cant be running back and forth 3-4 systems every 20 mins to drop your cargo. due to the lack of agility and the sheer amount of risk involved in traveling that distance a jump drive would be needed to do it safely. again capital ship range -- a cloaked can that only the launcher could see .. possible idea but your still facing a transportation problem and the can would require a very large size to be useful. this brings the issue of who could deploy it and pick it up... All done and said the largest issue facing many miners is not getting the ore out of the rocks but getting the ore to the stations. mining in an unsafe area (either lowsec pirate space or 0.0 alliance space) is simply not an option given the current mechanics and the overall weakness of the mining ships. in a way though this is a self fulfilling prophecy. they wont upgrade mining or put any man hour into it. since mining has been the bastard step child mining basically caps out and people move on to other things keeping the population of miners to a very low percentage. since miners are such a low percentage the put a very low percentage of man hours to improve mining. when will we see a break in this cycle?
Mystic Pete	Posted - 2008.04.14 11:26:00 - [48] I like the genral idea but I think making direct comparisons with combat ships isn't helpful. Having said that I'll now make the same mistake. In the same way that most tech2 combat ships fill a specific role perhaps ORE could release a line of ships or two that fill specific mining niches or overcome specific problems miners encounter. I'm sure the mining experts out there can come up with something better but off the top of my head. Combat Barge I'm thinking something mining wise like we currently have i.e. you can put 3 strip miners on it but have a few extra highs for defensive weapons. A launcher slot or so, I guess there would be a problem with turret slots as they could be used for more strip miners but this could be tweaked to work. Other than that make it a bit tougher and maybe heavier and slower. The Recon / Stealth Miner Speaks for itself really. A barge designed to get to belts in dangerous area by use of a cloaking device. This ship would also have superb electronics systems for surveying systems, perhaps before bringing in a mining team. This would probably have less cargo space and be relativly weak. Could possibly be used to cyno in a Rorqual. The Blockade Runner This would possibly be better incorporsted in either of the two above. You get the idea a barge with a ready fitted stab. Maybe have it as the toughest option sacrificing cargo space for increase armour and / or shielding system. These ships could be OREs response to the current persecution of miners by an alliance I don't need to advertise.
Mikenche	Posted - 2008.04.14 16:38:00 - [49] Originally by: Mystic Pete Combat Barge I'm thinking something mining wise like we currently have i.e. you can put 3 strip miners on it but have a few extra highs for defensive weapons. A launcher slot or so, I guess there would be a problem with turret slots as they could be used for more strip miners but this could be tweaked to work. Other than that make it a bit tougher and maybe heavier and slower. Strips do not take turret slots. That's precisely the reason that you can't fit a Hulk with two strips and a gun, even if you were willing to sacrifice the mining yield of one strip. A comment about the insurance thing - in order to make blowing up your own ships profitable, you need to account for the insurance cost, which is 30% of the insurance value at the highest level. So to profit from buying/building and blowing up a Myrm (with the 28mil insurance value someone mentioned), the ship itself would need to cost less than 19.6mil. This does not change the fact that insurance sets a low cap for mineral prices however. And as for doubling mining yield not affecting the game significantly - I say that's bovine excrement. There is currently a good supply for almost all ship types except capital ships, and with the few T2 ships with limited supply I seriously doubt it's due to a lack of minerals. Now if the influx of minerals is doubled, where would the extra ships go? Would people just start blowing ships up twice as fast? Surely not, unless their price halves or all players' income doubles. Since there is the cap set by insurance, I think a much more likely scenario is that miners would decrease the amount spent on mining while keeping the same income, freeing up time for other activities.
Aesynil Caldari The Unit...	Posted - 2008.04.14 16:53:00 - [50] Originally by: Mikenche And as for doubling mining yield not affecting the game significantly - I say that's bovine excrement. There is currently a good supply for almost all ship types except capital ships, and with the few T2 ships with limited supply I seriously doubt it's due to a lack of minerals. Now if the influx of minerals is doubled, where would the extra ships go? Would people just start blowing ships up twice as fast? Surely not, unless their price halves or all players' income doubles. Since there is the cap set by insurance, I think a much more likely scenario is that miners would decrease the amount spent on mining while keeping the same income, freeing up time for other activities. You aren't familiar with some of the miners that I know, then...They -would- continue to mine, because rather then mining half the time to make the same profit, they'd mine the same time to make twice the profit. Except...It -would- flood the market, wildly. Mineral prices would fluctuate wildly, and in the end, I feel miners would simply get in the habit of building ships and blowing them up for insurance. For example, doubling mining yield would effectively half the cost to build a ship (Not factoring in bpo, of course, and build time). So you have a 40M raven that blows up for...90M? I forget, lol. Even with insurance, that's profit. On the other hand, if CCP carefully monitered it, factored in the increased influx of minerals, and put in a matching mineral sink (aka, bigger capital ships, more outpost content, being able to manufacture pos's yourself, things of those natures) to make it so that those minerals have somewhere to go...Maybe. I don't pretend to understand these things. But if you add billions of extra minerals, they have to be given somewhere to go.
Mikenche	Posted - 2008.04.14 17:23:00 - [51] Originally by: Aesynil Originally by: Mikenche And as for doubling mining yield not affecting the game significantly - I say that's bovine excrement. There is currently a good supply for almost all ship types except capital ships, and with the few T2 ships with limited supply I seriously doubt it's due to a lack of minerals. Now if the influx of minerals is doubled, where would the extra ships go? Would people just start blowing ships up twice as fast? Surely not, unless their price halves or all players' income doubles. Since there is the cap set by insurance, I think a much more likely scenario is that miners would decrease the amount spent on mining while keeping the same income, freeing up time for other activities. You aren't familiar with some of the miners that I know, then...They -would- continue to mine, because rather then mining half the time to make the same profit, they'd mine the same time to make twice the profit. Except...It -would- flood the market, wildly. Mineral prices would fluctuate wildly, and in the end, I feel miners would simply get in the habit of building ships and blowing them up for insurance. For example, doubling mining yield would effectively half the cost to build a ship (Not factoring in bpo, of course, and build time). So you have a 40M raven that blows up for...90M? I forget, lol. Even with insurance, that's profit. On the other hand, if CCP carefully monitered it, factored in the increased influx of minerals, and put in a matching mineral sink (aka, bigger capital ships, more outpost content, being able to manufacture pos's yourself, things of those natures) to make it so that those minerals have somewhere to go...Maybe. I don't pretend to understand these things. But if you add billions of extra minerals, they have to be given somewhere to go. True, miners could maintain a certain level of income by exploiting insurance. I forgot about that. Also, in the first few days or weeks using the shiny new ships would get double profit from selling the minerals or ships until demand runs out. I don't think either of these are in the best interests of CCP. Are there any NPC corps buying minerals for a fixed price BTW?
Qual Gallente Cornexant Research	Posted - 2008.04.15 08:04:00 - [52] Originally by: mitalla oreaki people keep asking how I can think that increasing the supply will NOT lower the price of minerals. The answer is simple CCP wont allow it to. -- The sum total of all the minerals used to make a ship can not go under the sum total of the insurance amount. Why wouldn't CCP allow this? From an ISK influx point the player mineral prices are unintresting. Players will prevent this from happening As that means they can essentially by minerals with a rebate and "sell" for uber value. CCP couldnt care less, teh problem will fix itself. "The short version: Qual is right." -Papa Smurf
W3370Pi4 Caldari	Posted - 2008.04.15 11:14:00 - [53] capital mining ship idea http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=748936
mitalla oreaki	Posted - 2008.04.15 18:09:00 - [54] i think your capital mining ship is a nice start. my major points to re-clarify ... 1- currently a miner can hit his skill limit much easier then any other pilot. 2- ship progression stops very early into character life. 3- income progression stops very early into character life. 4- the need to spend money stops very early into character life. keep in mind that these bigger ships will give the miners something to spend all these minerals on as well as give them a place to spend skill points.
Tasko Pal Heron Corporation	Posted - 2008.04.15 21:02:00 - [55] Originally by: elric gallach get a black ops, stick mining lasers on it, and a cloak and go for it A battlecruiser would be far better. About a twentieth the cost and it has more turrents. All the recon/covert ops ships are nerfed as far as mining goes with too few turrents.
Tonto Auri Vhero' Multipurpose Corp	Posted - 2008.04.16 12:52:00 - [56] Edited by: Tonto Auri on 16/04/2008 12:54:58 Ok, guys and gals. I were declined to fall into any "wheel invention" topics like this, but You made me crying ang laughing at the same time. First, mining ship with cargobay worth hours of mining - macrominer's dream. Find Veldspar moon, point lasers on it and forget... for an hour or so. Why not rent office at station, mount mining lasers in windows and mine directly to the corp hangar then? Offense on mining ships (barges)... They are fragile gallentian scrapheaps of minmatar design (c) our CEO. Remember the (F = -F) formula? That "-F" will break barge from any weapon firing, except smallest ones. More defence is probably only viable solution. I think that just doubling the shield amount will make good deal. But anyway, powergrid is weak. And please keep in mind, that industry, and especially heavy industry, were always a result of collective work. And CCP clearly indicates that they are know and support this. Mining barges are for mining, haulers are for transporting stuff, etc. If You do not likes it... sorry. Probably You better go ratting? It's a nice soloable task. Add: Originally by: W3370Pi4 capital mining ship idea http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=748936 Same as ship with 30k cargo. Basically. -- Thanks CCP for cu

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.