EVE Search - Battleship gun size

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Battleship gun size

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Diomidis Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.01 14:12:00 - [31] Originally by: vostok Originally by: Mishallia Venari I dont care about size, proportion, physics, curved flight paths or Eifal Towers. i want the side of my strom to disappear in a fire ball like THIS every time i fire! Mish Exactly :D Nice concept...maybe the Mael will disappear in fireballs 10ths of times bigger than that...IF OXYGEN was THERE (in space) to support fireballs...just land your mael in a planet with earth-like atmosphere and enjoy the show... Till then, enjoy the fireballs other spacecrafts produce when they explode Join the Biggest Greek Corp! www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
InsanlyEvlPerson Gallente Night-Stalkers	Posted - 2008.12.01 14:14:00 - [32] Edited by: InsanlyEvlPerson on 01/12/2008 14:15:09 Originally by: vostok Originally by: InsanlyEvlPerson If you stop and think about it, you dont need big guns to kill a spaceship, all you have to do is breech enough decks of the ship and the crew dies =P Lets not start the discussion about whether battleships have crews or not. Also, you still need something to punch through a few 1600mm plates of tungsten with energized fields holding them together before you get to the juicy bits of the ship. my lasers will just melt it so i'm covered... nuclear bombs in arty shells? covered. rail charges traveling at high velocity and turning to plasma on impact? thats covered as well. i think the point is that this is just a game, and its not going to make any sense. as far as having bigger more dramatic guns on battleships go.... not reli an issue, i stoppped flying them with QR, they were already too slow for my taste, and now its just rediculous. --------------------------------------------- I may be a bit over Zealot, but i cant help myself, its the best investment i ever made!
Kain Garion	Posted - 2008.12.01 14:16:00 - [33] Originally by: vostok Originally by: InsanlyEvlPerson If you stop and think about it, you dont need big guns to kill a spaceship, all you have to do is breech enough decks of the ship and the crew dies =P Lets not start the discussion about whether battleships have crews or not. Also, you still need something to punch through a few 1600mm plates of tungsten with energized fields holding them together before you get to the juicy bits of the ship. see my previous post in the topic of how easy those plates would be gone. and the ships have crews as is stated in the Emperyan age novel from the head it was about 600 crew or so on a Mega. The inty pilot there mentioned it when he saw one beeing blown up.
vostok Minmatar Shadow of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.12.01 14:23:00 - [34] Originally by: Diomidis Nice concept...maybe the Mael will disappear in fireballs 10ths of times bigger than that...IF OXYGEN was THERE (in space) to support fireballs...just land your mael in a planet with earth-like atmosphere and enjoy the show... Till then, enjoy the fireballs other spacecrafts produce when they explode Hmmm not sure if it needs oxygen to do that. Obviously to explode there has to be oxygen there which is why all explosives have oxidising agents in them., Nitroglycerin for example supplies more oxygen than it needs to burn so it will oxidise anything its mixed with when it explodes (like charcoal) making the explosion more violent. I imagine a fair bit of the fire there is oxidisation with the air but you should still get a nice plasma plume. - Adaptation is not* an excuse for lack of ballance!* -
vostok Minmatar Shadow of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.12.01 14:35:00 - [35] This still doesn't explain why battleship guns are SO tiny. I think it's fairly obvious that eve is nothing like how real space combat would be so can we leave that aside. Small guns are massive on frigates Medium guns are pretty small on cruisers Large guns are tiny on battleships Extra Large guns are about right on dreads So ruling out warp cores, shield generators, capacitors, armour, engines and warp drives since frigs, cruisers and battleships all have them and it seems fairly safe to assume they grow in proportion to the ships. Why are BS guns so small? - Adaptation is not* an excuse for lack of ballance!* -
Kain Garion	Posted - 2008.12.01 14:49:00 - [36] Originally by: vostok This still doesn't explain why battleship guns are SO tiny. I think it's fairly obvious that eve is nothing like how real space combat would be so can we leave that aside. Small guns are massive on frigates Medium guns are pretty small on cruisers Large guns are tiny on battleships Extra Large guns are about right on dreads So ruling out warp cores, shield generators, capacitors, armour, engines and warp drives since frigs, cruisers and battleships all have them and it seems fairly safe to assume they grow in proportion to the ships. Why are BS guns so small? numerous reason have been said i list some. 1: effecency why go bigger if smaller does the job. 2: power useage. 3: ammo itself takes up a lot of space the bigger the gun the bigger the ammo. again leads back to 1 4: crew needs space to. 5: production of the weapon itself again look to 1. in essence the guns are that small because it is the most effiencient way for a BS to operate guns. a frig doesn't need crew space or a lot of other crap they are pretty simple build so have the power and space tp spare for the bigger guns if you compare it. for a cruiser it is the same as a BS use what is the most effiencient. A dread just uses these enormous guns for a simple reason. it is ment to take out space stations and other capital ships. and if you check thier design they can't do anythign els wile a BS is way more versitile. it all comes down to reason 1. to add: why do we use smaller sice guns? we can place 425mm guns on a rokh but some place on 350mm. why? because it is more effienct for thier purpose or fitting a better tank or some other things that would be possible with a 425mm guns. i can fit dual 150mm rails on a feroc but i don't as it is more efficient to use 200-250mm rails to forfil its sniping role. you fit the modules to amek it operate as best as possible in your wanted areas. and fitting a 3500mm rial gun ona rokh would mean i could carry verry little ammo :D
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.12.01 14:54:00 - [37] Edited by: Derek Sigres on 01/12/2008 14:55:10 There is absolutely nothing about Eve that implies realism is a goal anywhere on the list. FTL travel is a trivial affair. Guns fire projectiles at more or less infinite speed. Ships can accelerate at a sustained 100+ g's and the crew somehow manages to survive. Such things are staples of science fiction certainly, but the key here is it's fiction that has a plausible (as in believeable for it's purposes) explanation behind it all.
Diomidis Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.01 15:00:00 - [38] There must be few that connects modern projectile ammunition propellants and "EVE era" propellants... It's not a matter of whether you need oxygen to fire the weapon. Surely there is more than enough oxygen (in whatever form) inside cartridge the for the propellant to ignite, but since the maximum volume of gasses that this reaction produces is all the projectile weapon's / munition's engineer was after, it's not likely you will find a lot of oxygen left overs...on the contrary. Anyways, fireballs need ample oxygen and away from ideal conditions to burn red with thick black clouds etc...the WWI/WWII BS effect we all would like to have...that's not possible in space, and tho EVE is far from "realistic", it shouldn't turn out a fiction comedy... Join the Biggest Greek Corp! www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
InsanlyEvlPerson Gallente Night-Stalkers	Posted - 2008.12.01 15:02:00 - [39] Originally by: Derek Sigres Edited by: Derek Sigres on 01/12/2008 14:55:10 There is absolutely nothing about Eve that implies realism is a goal anywhere on the list. FTL travel is a trivial affair. Guns fire projectiles at more or less infinite speed. Ships can accelerate at a sustained 100+ g's and the crew somehow manages to survive. Such things are staples of science fiction certainly, but the key here is it's fiction that has a plausible (as in believeable for it's purposes) explanation behind it all. as fun as eve is, it falls very short on my plausability meter. firefly, ont he other hand, is a great example of a believable one. --------------------------------------------- I may be a bit over Zealot, but i cant help myself, its the best investment i ever made!
vostok Minmatar Shadow of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.12.01 15:26:00 - [40] Originally by: Kain Garion 1: effecency why go bigger if smaller does the job. 2: power useage. 3: ammo itself takes up a lot of space the bigger the gun the bigger the ammo. again leads back to 1 4: crew needs space to. 5: production of the weapon itself again look to 1. in essence the guns are that small because it is the most effiencient way for a BS to operate guns. a frig doesn't need crew space or a lot of other crap they are pretty simple build so have the power and space tp spare for the bigger guns if you compare it. for a cruiser it is the same as a BS use what is the most effiencient. A dread just uses these enormous guns for a simple reason. it is ment to take out space stations and other capital ships. and if you check thier design they can't do anythign els wile a BS is way more versitile. it all comes down to reason 1. to add: why do we use smaller sice guns? we can place 425mm guns on a rokh but some place on 350mm. why? because it is more effienct for thier purpose or fitting a better tank or some other things that would be possible with a 425mm guns. i can fit dual 150mm rails on a feroc but i don't as it is more efficient to use 200-250mm rails to forfil its sniping role. you fit the modules to amek it operate as best as possible in your wanted areas. and fitting a 3500mm rial gun ona rokh would mean i could carry verry little ammo :D You're missing the point completely. For the size battleship guns are, battleships don't need to be anywhere near as big as they are because what they have in them couldn't possibly take up as much space as they seems to. All I am proposing is that battleship guns are increased in size graphically so that they match the size of the ships they are fitted to. There is no real reason that battleships couldn't look amazingly cool like this picture apart from CCP not wanting to redo the ships. The fact of the matter is, if these were real ships,t hey would either have a hell of a lot more guns of this size, or they would have bigger guns. Now you mentioned production, why pray tell would you build a ship as big as a battleship is and then put a few tiny guns on it, you see when you look at it like that your theory stops making sense. And before you mention power production, this is a game set way in the future with amazingly advanced technology, there is no reason stuff should not look cool, and battleships just don't look anywhere near as cool as what they could do. crew need space too... ok, a megathron has 600 crew, a yamato battleship had around 2700 crew... crew don't need much space tbh. Also, I just said, frigates aren't simpler, they're smaller and they have less stuff, but a battleship is hundreds of times bigger than a frigate. You also go on about basing the size of guns on the names, that has almost nothing to do with the size of the guns on ships, the 425mm rails could be called 40mm rails and have the same stats, making is better to use the smaller 30mm rails. This is a concern of balance not aesthetics. Perhaps you thought I wanted battleships to do more damage? - Adaptation is not* an excuse for lack of ballance!* -

DubanFP Caldari R.U.S.T.	Posted - 2008.12.01 15:34:00 - [41] Edited by: DubanFP on 01/12/2008 15:34:02 At this point i'm fairly certain you're just trolling us now vost, goodbye. _______________ "It's not about the look of your ship or the size of your guns. It's about what kind of **** you can $@## up with it"
Marchocias Silent Ninja's	Posted - 2008.12.01 15:37:00 - [42] Larger gun => larger projectile (in the case of projectile / hybrid weapons). Larger projectile => larger momentum change => larger recoil. So the problem here is, if you make the guns look huge, it will look stupid if the ships don't start rolling around in space due to the recoil. Small guns may not look like they'll kick as much arse, but huge guns which don't have huge recoil would look even more strange in space. ---- Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacoughcoughaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrr!!
vostok Minmatar Shadow of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.12.01 15:41:00 - [43] Originally by: Diomidis There must be few that connects modern projectile ammunition propellants and "EVE era" propellants... It's not a matter of whether you need oxygen to fire the weapon. Surely there is more than enough oxygen (in whatever form) inside cartridge the for the propellant to ignite, but since the maximum volume of gasses that this reaction produces is all the projectile weapon's / munition's engineer was after, it's not likely you will find a lot of oxygen left overs...on the contrary. Anyways, fireballs need ample oxygen and away from ideal conditions to burn red with thick black clouds etc...the WWI/WWII BS effect we all would like to have...that's not possible in space, and tho EVE is far from "realistic", it shouldn't turn out a fiction comedy... You realise I assume that a ''fireball'' is merely a superheated carbon plasma cloud, which will be present with or without oxygen (though likely more present with). - Adaptation is not* an excuse for lack of ballance!* -
vostok Minmatar Shadow of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.12.01 16:00:00 - [44] Originally by: DubanFP Edited by: DubanFP on 01/12/2008 15:34:02 At this point i'm fairly certain you're just trolling us now vost, goodbye. It's honestly not my intention, I just don't think there has been much of a decent argument against having BS guns that fit the size of the ship. Originally by: Marchocias Larger gun => larger projectile (in the case of projectile / hybrid weapons). Larger projectile => larger momentum change => larger recoil. So the problem here is, if you make the guns look huge, it will look stupid if the ships don't start rolling around in space due to the recoil. Small guns may not look like they'll kick as much arse, but huge guns which don't have huge recoil would look even more strange in space. What might your feelings on dread guns be then, because dread gun size seems to be what most people agree is the ''right'' size for the ship. - Adaptation is not* an excuse for lack of ballance!* -
Imaos	Posted - 2008.12.01 16:46:00 - [45] Originally by: vostok Originally by: techzer0 Do we need to find the EVE BS vs. Real BS ship size comparison to show how the guns atually look fitting I mean... isn't a cruiser the size of the Eiffel tower? Right Eiffel tower is 324m tall and the Bismarck class BB was 251m long so I would call that comparable. Bismarck Vexor The point is the ships are capable of fitting much larger guns than they do. The main guns on the Bismarck were 400mm, but the minmatar med guns go up to 720mm, they should be frikkin huge. If you allow that big guns on a space vessel because navy ships can fit that big guns please also add recoil as movement alternative. Have you seen was large ship artillery does to the ship? Now apply that to space. Imaos ------------------------------------------ Originally by: NoNah My friend, this is EVE, as it's a space oriented game, they couldn't have trolls. We have Caldari.
vostok Minmatar Shadow of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.12.01 16:54:00 - [46] Originally by: Imaos Originally by: vostok Originally by: techzer0 Do we need to find the EVE BS vs. Real BS ship size comparison to show how the guns atually look fitting I mean... isn't a cruiser the size of the Eiffel tower? Right Eiffel tower is 324m tall and the Bismarck class BB was 251m long so I would call that comparable. Bismarck Vexor The point is the ships are capable of fitting much larger guns than they do. The main guns on the Bismarck were 400mm, but the minmatar med guns go up to 720mm, they should be frikkin huge. If you allow that big guns on a space vessel because navy ships can fit that big guns please also add recoil as movement alternative. Have you seen was large ship artillery does to the ship? Now apply that to space. Imaos What you quoted there has nothing to do with the recoil. The fact is that cruisers, the same size as battleships can fit guns nearly twice as big, however, from the pictures you can see that they appear smaller, which is a plain scaling error. Also I'll mention again about the recoil something like a dread would receive from a volley and remain completely stationary. - Adaptation is not* an excuse for lack of ballance!* -
Warlord7	Posted - 2008.12.01 17:39:00 - [47] I remember reading somewhere that the projectiles of eve were rocket assisted. I mean lets be real from the way ships move around without the crew tumbling around is enough to say that this should be left in imagination land and not thought out to thoroughly for real life. Besides look at inty's there crew in real life would have concussions and broken bones from the crazy way they move, whiplash galore. But I do agree I think BS's should have bigger model guns only for the aesthetics of the ship. It would also add a minor dynamic of looking at ships and determining what it is packing, good for recon work on the enemies. That part of realism I would gladly accept.
Terianna Eri Amarr Scrutari	Posted - 2008.12.01 17:48:00 - [48] Originally by: Kain Garion Originally by: vostok Originally by: InsanlyEvlPerson If you stop and think about it, you dont need big guns to kill a spaceship, all you have to do is breech enough decks of the ship and the crew dies =P Lets not start the discussion about whether battleships have crews or not. Also, you still need something to punch through a few 1600mm plates of tungsten with energized fields holding them together before you get to the juicy bits of the ship. see my previous post in the topic of how easy those plates would be gone. and the ships have crews as is stated in the Emperyan age novel from the head it was about 600 crew or so on a Mega. The inty pilot there mentioned it when he saw one beeing blown up. That's kind of unusual since one of the EVE chronicles mentions a pod-fitted Apocalypse having crew in excess of 6000. __________________________________ Originally by: Arthur Frayn How much to ruin all your holes, luv?
Karl Luckner	Posted - 2008.12.01 18:14:00 - [49] I think you are wrong. Battleship guns are not tiny in Eve. It's just that frigate sized guns are oversized. Look at the 125mm rail for example. That is exactly the caliber the russians use for their tanks, and many western navies use for frigate/destroyer sized guns. Those things are about 4m in length. Now could you explain it to me, why the guns in eve are about the size of a German U-206 ?
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.12.01 18:23:00 - [50] I would like to point out that, in terms of absolute power consumption and whatnot it's a good time to consider exactly what kind of power we're talking about here, but more importantly how it's used. First of all, consider this: the capaictor must be charged from the excess power produced by the power core - as such cap recharge should be based on the fudamental mechanics of the circuit and the amount of spare power available. In short, a ship with lots of spare powergrid (say a noobish Cruise PVE Raven with 3 power diagnostic systems in the lows for example) would more than likely recharge it's capacitor far faster than a ship that is incredibly tight on power grid remaining (say a tachyon fitted Abaddon). Yet the two functions are totally independent which tells us one of two scenarios is taking place: either cap is produced from another energy souce than the main reactor or this issue was never considered (or was discarded) during the design phase. Second, consider the fact that, at rest a battleship's weapon systems require the same power usage as they do when working - in the case of the mighty Tachyon Beam Laser II, this amounts to 4125 mega-watts of energy (without skills). To put that in perspective, the Tachyon consumes as much power as as an average country in Europe. The sheer amount of energy at play in this system is so far beyond the scope of what is possible given our modern understanding of basic mechanics that firing the weapon system would, in all probability, result in it's immediate destruction as the combined power of a star is suddenly forced through the system. Yet, not only does the weapon hold up under this tremendous strain, it delivers only slight levels of damage. Considering the amount of energy pumped through the system, the simple fact that it does not absolute annihilate anything that happens to be in it's path is something of a miracle. While on the subject of weapons, consider the uninspiring 1400mm artillery. Such a weapon surely fires a slug weighing in several tons. Given that any force that moves such a heafty slug forward must be met with an equal force opposing it, it stands to reason that each firing of this massive cannon would result in extreme forces being applied to the spacecraft. At best, this would result in a very percievable slowdown of the ship. In fact, since the projectile travels at infinite speed (given that it travels the full length of it's range the instant it's fired) the ship doing the firing would be propelled backwards at infinite speed (assuming there was infinite structural integrety). Yet, in the end what IF they did take proper mechanics into accont? Well, railguns would still fire a slug at tremendous velocity but a Rokh would still have a very noticable delay as their slug traveled the hundreds of kilometers to meet it's target. Projectiles would have it even worse as the projectile almost certainly could not be propelled as effeciently as that of a railgun (one can derive that this is the case given the fact that a railgun of particular size will deliver more damage on average than signficantly larger artillery shell). Suddenly, an amarrian laser banks would maintain that amazing advantage of guns: the instant hit (well, they have travel time but for all intents and purposes it's meaningless at the ranges used in Eve). If one wants to be reasonable about accelleration then they have to realize that under normal power (i.e. non warp drive power) accelleration beyond about 30 m/s^2 would rapidly result in the incapacation of the crew yet even a sluggish double plated triple trimarked abaddon running on it's MWD generates substantially more acceleration than this. Realism in all actuality has no place in a game when all it does is detract from the fun. Based on our current understanding of the universe, very little in Eve makes even a tiny amount of sense. Why force a game to imatate life when life simulates itself just fine?

vostok Minmatar Shadow of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.12.02 03:58:00 - [51] Originally by: Karl Luckner I think you are wrong. Battleship guns are not tiny in Eve. It's just that frigate sized guns are oversized. Look at the 125mm rail for example. That is exactly the caliber the russians use for their tanks, and many western navies use for frigate/destroyer sized guns. Those things are about 4m in length. Now could you explain it to me, why the guns in eve are about the size of a German U-206 ? If you look at the comparison of the bismarck to the vexor, the guns are a bit bigger on the bismarck considering the length of both is approximately the same, despite the vexor being capable of fitting guns twice the calibre of the bismarck. Also, I believe a 125mm rail cannot really be compared to a standard shell. It is believed that a fully operational railgun for use on aircraft carriers would have a comparable destructive force to a tomahawk missile with a fraction of the ammo costs. Also this is cool. Originally by: Derek Sigres Realism in all actuality has no place in a game when all it does is detract from the fun. Based on our current understanding of the universe, very little in Eve makes even a tiny amount of sense. Why force a game to imatate life when life simulates itself just fine? Because having big guns on battleships will look much better than having small guns on battleships like we do now... Also I believe everything else you said it totally irrelevant... I don't care that guns shouldn't actually be weapons that hit instantly, I care that my battleship has peashooters mounted on it. - Adaptation is not* an excuse for lack of ballance!* -
Nai Weil Caldari Tupperware Party	Posted - 2008.12.02 03:59:00 - [52] Originally by: Walker Bulldog I believe CCP stated that a Rifter is about as big as a real-life 747. Looking at this chart, Rifter is something like 7-8 pixels long, which makes one pixel equivalent to ten meters (747 is about 75 meters long). Apocalypse, on the same chart, is approximately 190 pixels long - that makes it almost two kilometers long, making it about seven times longer than the Iowa-class BB that you posted. Going by the same scale, the 1200/1400mm caliber guns that a Tempest fits seem to be about 50 meters long - plenty good enough for the caliber. It's not that the guns are small, it's the ships that are ridiculously huge. Off-topic question - what's that big badger in the Caldari pic? Is that a Badger Mark III? drool
Weirda Minmatar Queens of the Stone Age Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2008.12.02 05:07:00 - [53] Weirda think gun scale on Matari vessel very good (Muninn great for example). __ weirda
Nomakai Delateriel Amarr Shadow Company Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.12.02 05:18:00 - [54] Originally by: Nai Weil Off-topic question - what's that big badger in the Caldari pic? Is that a Badger Mark III? drool Fairly sure it's a Bustard (Deep space transport) ______________________________________________ -My respect can not be won, only lost. It's given freely and only grudgingly withdrawn.
Nai Weil Caldari Tupperware Party	Posted - 2008.12.02 06:15:00 - [55] Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel Originally by: Nai Weil Off-topic question - what's that big badger in the Caldari pic? Is that a Badger Mark III? drool Fairly sure it's a Bustard (Deep space transport) Bustard uses the Badger Mk II hull, though, so it would be the same as the middle one. Probably some ship they decided to pull from the game during development =(
Morgan La'Chance Caldari Dynamic Reallocation and Logistics	Posted - 2008.12.02 08:37:00 - [56] I thought Apoc was supposed to be only around 1 km long, much like the Rokh is supposed to be just shy of 1100m long.
techzer0 IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.12.02 08:51:00 - [57] Originally by: Nai Weil Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel Originally by: Nai Weil Off-topic question - what's that big badger in the Caldari pic? Is that a Badger Mark III? drool Fairly sure it's a Bustard (Deep space transport) Bustard uses the Badger Mk II hull, though, so it would be the same as the middle one. Probably some ship they decided to pull from the game during development =( Look here and you will see that the Badger you're talking about is labeled as the bustard. And the Crane uses the Badger Mk II, the Bustard is actually a little longer I believe. ------------ Originally by: Nexus Kinnon I could outgay you even without my pink tutu. >.>
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.12.02 11:28:00 - [58] The dread guns look about the right size on the dread hulls imo. I dont have a problem with the size of bs guns on bs's, but they shld really have more of them available to fit. 8 (16 visible) is simply not enough for a space ship that is over a kilometre long. EVE history t2 precisions
BiggestT Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.12.02 11:33:00 - [59] Originally by: Karl Luckner I think you are wrong. Battleship guns are not tiny in Eve. It's just that frigate sized guns are oversized. Look at the 125mm rail for example. That is exactly the caliber the russians use for their tanks, and many western navies use for frigate/destroyer sized guns. Those things are about 4m in length. Now could you explain it to me, why the guns in eve are about the size of a German U-206 ? You realise that a jag is about the size of an 747 aeroplane right? The guns are pretty well sized on frigs. EVE history t2 precisions
Squize Euphoria Released	Posted - 2008.12.02 11:46:00 - [60] This is how it should look, relative to the ship: BlasterRanis



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: 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.