EVE Search - Why not end the pretence and make highsec a safezone?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Why not end the pretence and make highsec a safezone?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.09.02 14:52:00 - [151] Originally by: Nathan Serpico All those neverending arguments would be solved with alternate rules servers. Choose your server, choose your playstyle. Everyone happy. (a lot less lag as well, but that's another story) Would also ruin the game. What new players in their right mind would join the old server with the 'cold and harsh' universe, when they could join the new server and live it up? So the old server dies, the 30+ players who have been playing for two years or more are alienated, they are replaced over a sixth month period with many newer players who are migrating from other similar games, and a year after the split the numbers start to decrease, spiraling into the game dying within a few years. New games coming out will do what EvE cannot ... provide a safe environment for those who are to naive and who must be coddled by the development staff and protected from violence and 'evil pirates.' And if EvE tried to do that, not only would they shoot their longstanding playerbase in the foot, but they would also have a crappy product that simply couldn't compete with those games designed around the issue from the start. Ruze Ashkor'Murkon Security File
E'Pock	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:03:00 - [152] ok, I might be a noob here but my question to all of you that are complaining about PvP in high sectors is this. 1) Why do you care if someone is just mining and making billions of isk? 2) if somone is just running missions then why do you need to PvP them? Honestly, grow up. This game is here for one reason and one reason only....to be played...and anyway people see fit. If you don't like the fact that high sectors are becoming more "safe" and less profitable for you then click your lil button that says "cancel account". I personally dont care if you come after me or not. This is after all "just a game" and I can find something else to do with my time if it gets "boring" To me so far in this post it seems like a bunch of PvP people whining that they cant do anything in high sector space anymore has totally destroyed the game for them. Is there not enough players out in 0.0 space to fight? Do you feel some justification in beating up on someone that all they want to do in this game is mine? What's it to you? My apologies to everyone that this doesnt apply to and also if i am wrong then i also apologize for that as well. Just giving my 2cents on this issue. =)
Myra2007 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:08:00 - [153] Originally by: CCP Greyscale ... The reason you are gonna get quoted is because in the past the answer would have been "No.". Plain and simple. Now its "oh hey the chance is really really remote". And whats there to take/quote out of context? Changing hisec to a pvp free zone is a possibility. (yeah remote and stuff but possible thats what counts imo) I remember a year or two ago wrangler answered a post about a similar issue (i think it even was about suicide ganking) like "Tough Luck! Deal with it. Eve isn't meant to be a cozy fluffy lala land.". That spirit seems to be all gone now. Generally speaking the wind has changed its direction and people can feel that. Its your game and no one questions that. But certainly the "cold harsh world" thing will be increasingly hard to justify given these and possible future changes(->wardecs are on the nerf list). Anyway thanks for a look into how you see things. I think many players have waited for this though some (like me) might not really like the answer. It was honest so kudos for that...
Myra2007 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:09:00 - [154] Edited by: Myra2007 on 02/09/2008 15:10:32 dbl post. Im a forum noob...
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:10:00 - [155] Originally by: Myra2007 I remember a year or two ago wrangler answered a post about a similar issue (i think it even was about suicide ganking) like "Tough Luck! Deal with it. Eve isn't meant to be a cozy fluffy lala land.". That spirit seems to be all gone now. And it still isn't. Now it just isn't "cozy fluffy lala land" for you people either. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:10:00 - [156] Originally by: E'Pock ok, I might be a noob here but my question to all of you that are complaining about PvP in high sectors is this. 1) Why do you care if someone is just mining and making billions of isk? 2) if somone is just running missions then why do you need to PvP them? Honestly, grow up. This game is here for one reason and one reason only....to be played...and anyway people see fit. If you don't like the fact that high sectors are becoming more "safe" and less profitable for you then click your lil button that says "cancel account". I personally dont care if you come after me or not. This is after all "just a game" and I can find something else to do with my time if it gets "boring" To me so far in this post it seems like a bunch of PvP people whining that they cant do anything in high sector space anymore has totally destroyed the game for them. Is there not enough players out in 0.0 space to fight? Do you feel some justification in beating up on someone that all they want to do in this game is mine? What's it to you? My apologies to everyone that this doesnt apply to and also if i am wrong then i also apologize for that as well. Just giving my 2cents on this issue. =) How many people play a game with the intent of remaining mediocre or poor? I don't know about you, but I do know that I don't have the highest competitive drive in the world, but even I strive to be better than the next guy, at least a little. There are many games which put no real value on characters. In EvE, though, competition and 'winning' is entirely possible. EvE makes a p*ss-poor casual game, I hate to say. Most of the things you can do take immense amounts of time. Nearly everything requires an investment of some sort, and you can lose out. It is 'just a game.' But as much as I might play a game of Risk for the fun, I'm also playing it to win. And playing in a game world like EvE, where every single player affects every single other player, it's kind of hard to ignore what one guy is doing. In the same line, it's just a game, who cares if you are overcrowding server nodes, ruining the player-run economy with an overproduction of isk, destroying the game experiences of industrialists by flooding the market with cheap modules that devalue the efforts of miners and producers, hurt the LP market by flooding the market with faction items, and generally kill trading by lowering profit margins. Who cares, right? Ruze Ashkor'Murkon Security File
Myra2007 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:12:00 - [157] Originally by: An Anarchyyt Originally by: Myra2007 I remember a year or two ago wrangler answered a post about a similar issue (i think it even was about suicide ganking) like "Tough Luck! Deal with it. Eve isn't meant to be a cozy fluffy lala land.". That spirit seems to be all gone now. And it still isn't. Now it just isn't "cozy fluffy lala land" for you people either. You people? As in what? I haven't suicide ganked anyone ever. As a matter of fact i've never done any kind of agression in hisec so spare me that crap.
Xevan Templar 7th Batavian Squadron	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:14:00 - [158] Originally by: CCP Greyscale If you spend a couple of weeks pinning down the schedule of a particular dysprosium freighter and attack it with a well-planned ambush, that's cool gameplay, and serves as a suggestion that maybe if you're shipping such large volumes of high-value goods you might want to at least vary your schedule a little. The very first freighter suicide-gank that I'm aware of, back when freighters didn't even drop loot, was another example of good gameplay - the goal there wasn't to make a quick buck, it was to deny the enemy crucial supplies, which is an excellent goal in a strategic game. To me that sounds like cool, well thought of gameplay. And as I see it it's the direction CCP is thinking. good post.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:14:00 - [159] Originally by: Myra2007 Originally by: An Anarchyyt Originally by: Myra2007 I remember a year or two ago wrangler answered a post about a similar issue (i think it even was about suicide ganking) like "Tough Luck! Deal with it. Eve isn't meant to be a cozy fluffy lala land.". That spirit seems to be all gone now. And it still isn't. Now it just isn't "cozy fluffy lala land" for you people either. You people? As in what? I haven't suicide ganked anyone ever. As a matter of fact i've never done any kind of agression in hisec so spare me that crap. Me neither, but anyone in support of the sandbox is obviously a griefer and a ganker. Hell, anyone in support of PvP in general is an evil individual who secretly a homicidal maniac, rapist and murderer, and should be branded with a scarlet letter in order to keep the masses safe. Ruze Ashkor'Murkon Security File
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:14:00 - [160] Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 02/09/2008 15:15:12 Originally by: Myra2007 Originally by: An Anarchyyt Originally by: Myra2007 I remember a year or two ago wrangler answered a post about a similar issue (i think it even was about suicide ganking) like "Tough Luck! Deal with it. Eve isn't meant to be a cozy fluffy lala land.". That spirit seems to be all gone now. And it still isn't. Now it just isn't "cozy fluffy lala land" for you people either. You people? As in what? I haven't suicide ganked anyone ever. As a matter of fact i've never done any kind of agression in hisec so spare me that crap. Whiners, idiots, and pubbies. You most definitely fall in all three categories. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:15:00 - [161] Originally by: CCP Greyscale Changes in the mineral market and knock-on effects on ship prices relative to insurance in the recent past have changed all that by making the cost of losing a ship to CONCORD increasingly small, and thus the necessary cargo value of a target for a hit to be profitable also considerably smaller, so we've taken steps to redress the balance. Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU for confirming what I've been saying all along. You have no idea. I was starting to think maybe I was a crazy person or something. But it begs a couple questions: 1) Why are you addressing the symptoms of the mineral market madness? Is there no intention to rectify that situation itself? 2) Why is it even possible for Insurance Payout versus Ship Cost to get so out of wack? Shouldn't there be a dynamic mechanism in place to guard against just such a thing? Seems to me that that would have lead to a finer balance than just wacking out insurance all together. Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Lindsay Logan	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:15:00 - [162] Originally by: 5pinDizzy but doesn't it make sense? No.
Nahir	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:16:00 - [163] noooo dont ban wardecs! O.o i wana be able to kill *******s in highsec aswell!
Spenz Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:18:00 - [164] Edited by: Spenz on 02/09/2008 15:18:50 Originally by: An Anarchyyt Originally by: Myra2007 I remember a year or two ago wrangler answered a post about a similar issue (i think it even was about suicide ganking) like "Tough Luck! Deal with it. Eve isn't meant to be a cozy fluffy lala land.". That spirit seems to be all gone now. And it still isn't. Now it just isn't "cozy fluffy lala land" for you people either. Ooooh burn. I agree 100%. Suicide-gankers are the carebears of pvp. They make no-risk isk, but unlike the pve carebear, they do it at the expense of others, and with metagaming tactics. They aren't whining because they feel that eve is losing some magic element that makes it "different" or whatever, they are whining because they are losing their isk-faucet. They can no longer make easy money ganking, and they are upset about that. Get over it you whiners. Congrats you have to make isk the hard way like everyone else who decided that they were above metagaming. If I had an Alt I would probably post with it...
Ironnight Caldari EBS9	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:21:00 - [165] Originally by: E'Pock ok, I might be a noob here but my question to all of you that are complaining about PvP in high sectors is this. 1) Why do you care if someone is just mining and making billions of isk? 2) if somone is just running missions then why do you need to PvP them? 1. Because it tends to ruin the marked. 2. Too stop them making a bil isk in total safety, flooding the marked with cheap faction mods, see #1. They're like 'oh shit son, its a trap ' Doomsday[/center]
Arkeladin	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:24:00 - [166] Originally by: Valan Edited by: Valan on 02/09/2008 00:23:25 Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Valan Originally by: Le Skunk CCP have indicated VERY clearly that they want pvp out of high sec and into low sec areas. SKUNK No they haven't they've stated clearly millions of times nowhere is safe. I can search out the posts from the Devs and put them up there for you to see its even in the player guides and FAQ. Can you? no because they don't exsist. If they wanted it out they would've eliminated with the latest patch. I don't mind people putting across a point of view that differs from mine. But thats just telling porky pies now isn't it? On the one hand, what CCP say On the other hand, what they're doing. See any contrast? There was an epidemic of high sec ganking hence the need for a balance, to be honest rightly so it was far too easy. However, people need to take note. After the patch you can STILL GANK it'll take more effort and the target will have to be more profitable. It's been balanced not irradicated if you wander out in a T1 hauler with billions after the patch thinking you're safe you're not. Granted it looks like a tone down but this is a less severe patch than the one to counteract the zombie incident YEARS ago and the high sec gank is still here. EDIT: It had to be balanced because the nature of the game has changed the player base is a lot dumber than before. Quoted for truth - it IS a tone-down. Be glad the devs didn't implement once change that was requested.... That CONCORD hang around and kill ANYONE save the owners that went for the leftover cans after a suicide gank. have 'em hang until the cans eiter were reclaimed by theiur original owners OR popped. That would have removed any profit from suicide ganks COMPLETELY, as the ganker couldn't get any loot. Or his buddies, or passers-by, etc. At least now, you just have to be a bit more careful in picking your targets to be profitable. It's hardly the death of highsec PvP, it's just the pirate now has to be a bit more intelligent. It should also have a weaning effect on those who gank for lulz - those types will get forced into wardecs/lowsec. And piracy will be the better for it
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:25:00 - [167] There is nothing wrong with making hisec safer. Suicides were out of control and it only makes sense to me to revoke their insurance if they are convicted of committing a heinous act of violence. It's not like they can't ever get insurance after that. War Dec's are poorly designed, in my opinion. Too much power in the aggressor, leaving far too many loopholes in what is a wholly legal action. I mean, this is sponsored by CONCORD and DED, right? What government in their right mind would allow two corporations to KILL each other, with nothing more than a couple mil in upfront payment? Now, if it was called a 'bribe' or 'lobbying', maybe. But if it's a legitimate government-sanctioned event, it needs to have all the red tape to go along with it. And lets look at the sec changes to CONCORD? Seems all fair and good to me. You do crime in higher sec, you take a higher hit. Anyone who would blantently attack someone in front of a police officer doesn't really have a defense when he gets painted a hardened, crazed criminal. And the buff to losec crime is pretty steep, too. This being said, where's the trade-off? Where do hisec occupants (such as myself) pay for this added protection? Do we get higher taxes? Or are we getting all the perks, and no downsides? That don't exactly seem fair to me. Ruze Ashkor'Murkon Security File

CCP Greyscale	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:37:00 - [168] Originally by: Le Skunk I wish CCP Mat would respond to that - if only its to say "im sorry i said such a stupid thing - ill get back to fixing typos in ship descriptions Hi. Caveat: the entry you're quoting is, AFAIK, the CSM secretary's summary of the discussion, and is not a direct quote. (If it was, you'd likely see quotation marks around it.) I don't remember whether I actually used the word "grief" or not during the discussions. That said, I meant what I said then and I stand by it now. Hisec has existed as part of the game since the beginning. It has a specific purpose: to provide a geographic area which is comparatively safer than other areas of the game, to the extent that all other things being equal and in contrast with other areas, it's reasonable to expect that you won't be attacked by other players. That's a good and indeed highly desirable reason for a feature to exist in almost any MMO. War decs also serve a purpose, and create a specific scenario where all other things are not equal. From my point of view their gameplay purpose is to allow player corporations to target specific other player corporations who would otherwise be invulnerable in order to achieve specific strategic goals that couldn't be otherwise achieved. That's also a very good reason for a feature to exist in my opinion. As currently implemented, war decs also allow any arbitrary player corp to attack any member of any other arbitrary player corp within secure space with minimal warning and for basically any possible reason one cares to imagine, including "no reason at all" and "I just wanted to ruin other players' day". This is not, in my opinion, a good reason for a feature to exist - indeed, all other things being equal (there's that phrase again!) it's a good reason for a feature not to exist, and the fact that the wardec system does exist and that what's being discussed is a modification to remove just the undesirable side-effects and to try and avoid making substantive changes to the feature in the meantime I think speaks volumes about how serious we are about enabling the type of gameplay permitted by the wardec system as used according to its above-described purpose. All that said though, the ability to easily create conditions where a player corp can arbitrarily bypass the penalties for non-consensual combat in highsec space is unjustifiable as a design goal, and indeed flatly contradicts core design elements (the existance of highsec space) for no good reason. This applies doubly so while the mechanics necessarily compel players to leave social structures (corporations) in order to avoid becoming victim to such mechanics. If it can cleanly be removed, it should be. Allowing a player corp full of hardened combat veterans to pay a relatively small amount of money and be able to freely and without penalty attack a small group of players with whom they have absolutely no past relationship and who represent neither any kind of threat nor any kind of challenge and whose death will generate no rewards is absolutely a pay-to-grief system - indeed, it's a definitive example - and I don't see how it has any place in this game. And no, the phrase "cold uncaring universe" is not shorthand for "griefer's paradise", as the latter would contain far too many elements of pure farce to qualify as the kind of serious setting that I believe was the original intent behind the phrase. tl;dr I have no intention of apologizing for the things I have said on this issue - I stand by them completely, and I fully support Hammer's position on the subject as well, both because I believe the position they represent is fully justified and because to support the contrary opinion (that it's OK for people to grief if they feel like it provided they jump through one small hoop first) would IMO lead the game down a path which would kill it stone dead, and I have no intention of letting that happen if I can possibly prevent it.

Death4free Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:43:00 - [169] is there anyone in ccp actually interested in preserving non consensual pvp since ur ideas suck tbh Eve information kiosk
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:45:00 - [170] Originally by: Death4free is there anyone in ccp actually interested in preserving non consensual pvp since ur ideas suck tbh Way to miss what he said. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr

midge Mo'yb Antares Shipyards Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:47:00 - [171] Greyscale while i agree with your comments partially, ccp are continually overdoing some things, suicide ganking worked because you lost nothing with current ship prices/insurance you just bought a new if you failed. but making concord pop up near enough instantly and instapop/instaneut you makes it nigh impossible to gank now, whereas the no insurance from ilegal actions would have made the gankers much more weary about what they were about to do other than oo juicy attack! :/ ccp throw too much at the "issues" nowadays instead of touching it up stepping back and tacking a look and ajusting it again if it didnt have the intended actions -----------------------------------------------
Malcanis RuffRyders Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:50:00 - [172] Originally by: CCP Greyscale Clarification Thank you for making your position clear: hi-sec PvP should really be either consensual and/or between "equals", (however that can be determined). There is to be no real scope for players to act as villains. Gotcha. That's pretty much what we'd inferred already, but it's considerate of you to confirm it. Now we can put the arguments about it to rest and move on to the next phase. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Navdaq Gallente	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:50:00 - [173] The direction Greyscale is trying to take the game will make it better. .
Carniflex Caldari StarHunt Fallout Project	Posted - 2008.09.02 15:56:00 - [174] Originally by: Navdaq The direction Greyscale is trying to take the game will make it better. . Have to agree. Or well, he aint 'taking' it there, just making sure that 'stuff' is how it's supposed to be. However, current 'problem' (if you can say so) is that game is designed around single character but every account has 3 slots (allowing to large degree escape results of your actions) what in turn is even more magnified by the considerable portion of players with multiple accounts.
Jarvis Hellstrom Gallente The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance	Posted - 2008.09.02 16:09:00 - [175] I disagree with the OP. I also disagree with the 'sky is falling WoW in space' types. What we are seeing is evolution. CCP hasn't changed their mind, they're fixing things that are busted (in their view). Are they right? Depends on your point of view. Will Wardecs go away from Highsec? No. They (hopefully) just won't be pointless ways to blackmail people who aren't ready (or aren't willing) to do the low/null sec thing or to generate easy ganks against folks entirely unsuited to fighting. That's pretty much the case now and some folks like it that way. Mostly not the people on the receiving end, although there are exceptions. I recall all too well my earlier days when I could only fly a cruiser and our smallish mission running corp was wardecced by some group we'd never heard of. They declared themselves 'pirates' and we were to pay them 100 million or they'd 'destroy us'. Uh huh. There were two of them. Two folks, one of whom had a fairly nice Raven. The other guy had something else, not so combat capable IIRC. Well, they picked on the wrong folks. Vixen told them to go bark at the moon and we all went looking for wartargets. In the end we pinned the guy in a high sec station in his Raven and he wouldn't come out to play aside from station jockeying, which he got the worst of every time while all of Local laughed at him for starting a war but not being willing to fight it. Poor kid wanted to play 'Mean Pirate' and make a lot of easy money. Wound up losing his prized ship and not being treated very well. Who did this system benefit? He didn't come out well, he bit off more than he could chew and got crushed. Our non combat players had their ops interrupted due to having to watch for war attacks and generally were annoyed. Our combat folks never got a stand up fight out of it, only annoying station jockeying. In short - no one won. The biggest reason no one won was the really important one for a game. No one had fun. So yeah - of course the wardec system needs work if this is what it generates. It doesn't serve the purpose a corporate war should - acquiring resources, markets or territories. It isn't fun (unless it's totally one sided in which case it might be fun for the sociopath gank types) and it isn't even terribly good roleplaying. It doesn't make EVE "Cold and Harsh" it makes it New Eden 90220. In short, it's juvenile. It's not serving its intended purpose. Before running around all doom and gloom, why not give CCP a chance to actually fix the issue and create something better? May God stand between you and harm in all the Empty places you must walk (Old Egyptian Blessing)
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2008.09.02 16:10:00 - [176] Originally by: CCP Greyscale long post Much like Malcanis already said, thank you for explaining that the old days are gone. The dog-eat-dog world we grew to love is being replaced by a world where 'consentual' and 'fair' are the key words. That is very good to know, because it makes the decision of wether or not to continue playing the game much easier. Now, if you could have said this two years ago I needn't have bothered signing up in the first place. Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
Dionisius Gallente Vagabundos	Posted - 2008.09.02 16:11:00 - [177] Greyscale ftw, those were the best news i could have read so far today. _____________________________________
Siberys Gallente Nebula Sharks	Posted - 2008.09.02 16:13:00 - [178] How many drugs did you take, OP, before you made this thread?
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2008.09.02 16:13:00 - [179] Edited by: Anaalys Fluuterby on 02/09/2008 16:14:34 Originally by: Ki An Much like Malcanis already said, thank you for explaining that the old days are gone. The dog-eat-dog world we grew to love is being replaced by a world where 'consentual' and 'fair' are the key words. That is very good to know, because it makes the decision of wether or not to continue playing the game much easier. Now, if you could have said this two years ago I needn't have bothered signing up in the first place. Can I have your stuff? (I've been wanting to say that forever....) added: Seriously though, I don't want anyone to leave over an clarification of a GAME. But CCP has been saying for the last year and a half players were taking things beyond game intentions. ------------------------------------------------- Originally by: CCP Wrangler Not it isn't, people should be encouraged to get out in low sec space, but never forced to do so.
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.09.02 16:21:00 - [180] Originally by: Ki An Originally by: CCP Greyscale long post Much like Malcanis already said, thank you for explaining that the old days are gone. The dog-eat-dog world we grew to love is being replaced by a world where 'consentual' and 'fair' are the key words. That is very good to know, because it makes the decision of wether or not to continue playing the game much easier. Now, if you could have said this two years ago I needn't have bothered signing up in the first place. I'm usually not one that likes to stoop to your level, but you'll find the response you gave me on another thread quite appropriate here. Originally by: Ki An I'm glad you've finally come to your senses, Exlegion. Have a nice life (in Empire) and stay away from these threads in the future. Just replace my name with your own. Karma's a biatch, ain't it? One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: 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.