These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey] Tech 1 Battleships - Amarr

First post First post First post
Author
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#261 - 2013-04-08 22:27:09 UTC
Gabriel Karade wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Gabriel Karade wrote:
The Amarr 'drone boat' brain bug needs to be killed with fire, period.

They are not the drone race, the Arbitrator (the first drone boat) was a 'quirk', nothing more, but recent CCP devs (i.e. the last couple years) seem to have allowed this brain bug to grow and grow... Straight

Quote:
The Arbitrator is unusual for Amarr ships in that it's primarily a drone carrier. While it is not the best carrier around, it has superior armor that gives it greater durability than most ships in its class.


Seriously, stop trampling 10 years of back story for quick gains.

Out of date flavor text aside, Amarr have ALWAYS heavily favored drones. Now if you choose to ignore this fact you'd still be left with the point that 2 missile and 2 drone races are a sound concept and emphasizing this is not a bad thing.

Diversity in your BS lines is a GOOD thing. It makes it more difficult to counter effectively.
Sorry mate but no - they haven't. Short history lesson for you:

The arbitrator was changed to a 'drone boat' in the first pass at cruiser rebalance a good few years ago (this was long after the days when the Thorax was *the* drone cruiser, fielding heavy drones...), but that has never been an Amarr thing until the very recent (in my terms) additions of recons with drones (fine, they are the T2 versions of the arbitrator), drone frigates (Sentinel? that was out of the blue), drone destroyers (ok, where'd that come from?), drone BC (seriously, what?) and now drone BS (no, just no…)

Gallente had the only line of ships that could field 15 (or in the case of the Moros, 35) drones. Perhaps I'm a 'bitter vet' (but I think 9 years of running two accounts entitles me to a pretty strong opinion on the matter...) but I really don't like this homogenising of racial doctrines, as a quick an easy fix to balance (perceived or otherwise) issues.

Amarr are, and have always been about shiny armour ships with lasers. You may think have a 2:2 format is a good idea, I think it’s pretty terrible when there is and always was, scope to keep 4 distinct racial doctrines.

I'm a beta pilot also, good to meet you. Smile
Now I may be getting a bit long in the tooth, but I don't seem to remember a time when drones weren't the Arbitrators primary weapons system. Perhaps you could provide a link to refresh my memory.

Recon ships, of course, don't go back that far... but they do go back several years. Certainly more than long enough to be considered a firm part of EvE lore.

Not that it matters that much to me. Frankly, since CCP created the lore (and still continues to do so) if they choose to say that Amarr has chosen to adopt a new secondary weapons system that is well within their purview... and 6 months later it wouldn't even raise an eyebrow.

By the way, I think you misunderstand. I never said their would or should be only 2 racial doctrines. I was referring to broad weapons groupings/trends that CCP lined lined out over a couple of years ago. They were pretty clear that while there would be considerable overlap that Amarr and Gallante would lean more towards drones, and that Minmatar and Caldari would lean more towards missiles (in very general terms).

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#262 - 2013-04-08 22:29:38 UTC
I don't know what the cruise/torpedo change is going to be, but if it made a significant difference wouldn't the geddon become way OP? Heavy ranged boosted neuts and capless damage seems like a dangerous combination.

But I don't jack or squat.
progodlegend
Syndicate Enterprise
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#263 - 2013-04-08 22:29:43 UTC
I only got through the first four pages before noticing that tons of people seem to be claiming that the resist nerf (and therefore EHP nerf) is a buff to alpha fleet. And while you guys are in a way right, the less ehp a ship has the easier it is to alpha, you guys are missing the point about why alpha fleets are so popular.

The reason the alpha fleet is so useful, and artillery doctrines are so popular, is because it is extremely difficult to kill some of these high EHP ships before reps hit. The problem isn't alpha fleet, it's EHP, if you want to get rid of alpha fleet, you need to lower EHP. If you can kill high ehp ships with other high dps lower alpha gun systems, than alpha fleet loses it's advantage.

But tbh, just looking at it from that particular angle of killing alpha fleet by reducing EHP, there are too many variables not being taken into account, and the changes to pvp to balance artillery and EHP are much more complicated than just reducing overall EHP in game.

As far as the BS changes are concerned, the geddon is a really nice change, love it. The key with these BS changes that Kil2 and fozzie should be asking themselves is, "could I make a viable fleet concept with this ship, or find a valuable role for this ship as a support role in an existing concept". I get that some of the bs are meant to be smallgang/solo ships, but most of them are fleet ships, and so far, I can think of a variety of uses for all 3 of the amarr batlleships going forward, where as before the abaddon was the only truly useful battleship. The geddon lost it's use when people stopped using close range battleships all together (no point in having high dps if you can't stay in range of the target), and while Navy apoc's are quite useful right now, the poor man's version that some people occasionally fit on their apoc's, was terrible, and doesn't deserve to be considered a "concept".
Crash Lander
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#264 - 2013-04-08 22:32:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Crash Lander
Reading the posts, every concern has been mentioned at least multiple times by now. There was a single dev reply in the Gallante thread and no reply here so far.

Lets wait for some dev replies to see where they stand. That should give a reasonable idea to how receptive to the feedback they are.
Dehval
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#265 - 2013-04-08 22:34:15 UTC
Ersahi Kir wrote:
I don't know what the cruise/torpedo change is going to be, but if it made a significant difference wouldn't the geddon become way OP? Heavy ranged boosted neuts and capless damage seems like a dangerous combination.

But I don't jack or squat.

It can already fit Projectiles. So unless the cruise/torp changes are significant, a geddon would be fielding turrets.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#266 - 2013-04-08 22:44:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Veshta Yoshida
What happened with "BS are in a good spot so don't expect any major changes"? That was said only 2-3 months ago .. there is fickle and then there is that.
CCP Rise wrote:
+4% Armor resistances (-1% per level)

Wonder of wonders, CCP caves to thread hijacks from Gallente "we dont like that other have a bonus that blobs better" lobby .. you'll be changing all resist bonuses to +4% I take it? If you do, might going over the numbers again because a hull like the punisher will be sub-par to say the least.
The Abaddon does indeed brawl like a champ, but only in large'ish gangs/fleets where overlapping fields of fire can counteract the horrible laser tracking and it can be fed cap, haven't read the Gallente thread yet but I am willing to wager that something is done to make Domi work excellently in medium/long range scenarios with no close range sacrifices and that the Mega gets a big bump as well (optimal on top of tracking perhaps) to do the same .. not sure about the buttplug, because have not been exposed to it enough to comment.
CCP Rise wrote:
There is some concern that the new Apoc will have a significant cap weakness...

Ya think! Why not just remove a mid on Abad/Apoc and give them a healthy base cap increase .. the injector is going to mandatory at any rate so no harm in taking that heinous false 'choice' away.
That is .. unless you are also working on a laser revamp similar to what you did for projectiles, blasters and missiles (partially at any rate). We going to get the 3rd pulse option in M/L size? Tracking bonus on heatsinks? Less EM on crystals as one goes up range? .. reckon not = mandatory fitting requirements..
CCP Rise wrote:
This is a fun one. Bet you guys didn't think ...

Predicted it ages ago (by the way CCP tells time at least, really only about a month or so in the real world) that either Apoc or Geddon, with bets on Geddon, would get the same treatment that you gave other proud laser hulls/classes and create some lame-ass drone boats.

I'll ask again: Before you start molesting T2, would you mind sharing/explaining the new paradigms you are obviously using, because the old one of each race having distinct strengths/weakness and variations in what to expect from a given race is no longer valid with every race having hulls to do anything on their own?

PS: Why not missiles .. damage+explo velo on Apoc/Geddon for instance solves all the "issues" you set out to without having to copy the Baddon (Apoc) or make some foul Domi/Bhaal hybrid (Geddon).
PPS: Now off to see if I was right about Gallente becoming awesome at all ranges instead of just awesome close in and adequate at long. Smile
PPPS: Damn am I tuned into the way CCP works or what! .. They are floundering on the buttplug like I am and both Domi and Mega are made omni-potent at all ranges, their Mega solution was unexpected bu outcome the same .. RIP cross training for maximum performace Sad
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#267 - 2013-04-08 22:47:59 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
Ok, so other then being a couple of monkeys and flinging **** at each other, none of you are providing facts to back up your arguments, simply spouting off about why your own opinion of it is the right one. Why not shelve it, wait for the changed ships to be put on Sisi, and actually test it out, rather then making assumptions?

Fair point Pelea.

To be perfectly fair, many of the changes listed so far will likely be tweaked or changed completely before this goes on the test server, so no point getting too wrapped up in it either way at this point. It may very well be deemed that longer range on 7 unbonused neuts is a bit too dangerous vs cap dependent ships (yes, I know the Talos pilots and blaster advocates in general are worried about it). They may end up changing that to a neut amount bonus instead, making it in essence a poor mans Bhaalgorn.

I'll want to play around with it and see if a 7 heavy neut fit is even practical (in terms of fitting and cap) on the proposed geddon... and I too am concerned about potentially overshadowing the Domi.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#268 - 2013-04-08 22:48:17 UTC
Dehval wrote:
Ersahi Kir wrote:
I don't know what the cruise/torpedo change is going to be, but if it made a significant difference wouldn't the geddon become way OP? Heavy ranged boosted neuts and capless damage seems like a dangerous combination.

But I don't jack or squat.

It can already fit Projectiles. So unless the cruise/torp changes are significant, a geddon would be fielding turrets.


Fair enough. It seems like the geddon is the new typhoon, less a little bit of turret damage.
Vremennoi Omaristos
Temporary flight
#269 - 2013-04-08 22:52:21 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Why do I spend so much time studying lasers? And all branches Amar? Where do I apply them? And so it is, half the ship missile. If I wanted a rocket, I would have developed the Caldari, If the drone is Gallente. Instead of making less capo dependent, in my opinion. This is very annoying. In my many corporations are beginning to swing Matar branch *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal
Maximille Biagge
Yamagata Syndicate
The Initiative.
#270 - 2013-04-08 22:54:07 UTC
Dino Boff wrote:
37.5 km range to heavy neut is bad... How will you tackle those things?


Lachesis/arazu or overheated T2 points with loki boosts, inties with loki boosts, faction points with loki boosts. etc.

Still, the geddon changes are terrible, nobody really needs 38km neuts in a BS fleet, ever. 25km was fine for the situations where neuts on BS are even used (neuting caps or brawling close range).

If you wanted to make the geddon a non-lasor BS then just give it drones and armor resists/HP to make it like a big prophecy.

Or if you really wanted ot give it some kidn of EWAR bonus (even though you wrote that caldari will remain the only race with an EWAR BS) then at least give it TDs like all the other t1 amarr ships.
Alayna Le'line
#271 - 2013-04-08 22:56:45 UTC
Maximille Biagge wrote:
Dino Boff wrote:
37.5 km range to heavy neut is bad... How will you tackle those things?


Lachesis/arazu or overheated T2 points with loki boosts, inties with loki boosts, faction points with loki boosts. etc.

Still, the geddon changes are terrible, nobody really needs 38km neuts in a BS fleet, ever. 25km was fine for the situations where neuts on BS are even used (neuting caps or brawling close range).

If you wanted to make the geddon a non-lasor BS then just give it drones and armor resists/HP to make it like a big prophecy.

Or if you really wanted ot give it some kidn of EWAR bonus (even though you wrote that caldari will remain the only race with an EWAR BS) then at least give it TDs like all the other t1 amarr ships.


And Gallente used to be the only race with drone bonuses (Amarr just had big drone bays and zero bonuses to them), it's not like these changes have been obsoleting the Gallente drone lineup or anything. In positive news, I expect Dominixes to drop considerably in price.
Doc Severide
Doomheim
#272 - 2013-04-08 23:04:48 UTC
Taking away 2 High turrets from the Geddon? Crap, just stupid jerk off crap...
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#273 - 2013-04-08 23:10:19 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
After looking at the Armageddon and Dominix stats I must voice a certain degree of displeasure.

The problem: They both have pretty much the same damage dealing power.


Allow me to explain...

The Armageddon is overall better and more useful due to its ability to field heavy neutralizers with a range bonus. The 'Geddon also has more fitting options because of its vastly higher powergrid (which, to be fair, comes at the cost of CPU... but that can be more easily worked around).

The Dominix's new drone tracking and optimal bonus will certainly be useful in SOME situations (like station or gate camping) bit is still gimmicky as it doesn't really give the ship any real tactical advantage in an actual battleship brawl (sentries and heavy drones don't have a problem tracking slow battleships... and they still won't be able to keep up with anything cruiser sized and/or speedy).


If these changes go through I will have little reason to go for a Dominix. The same functionality can be found in the Armageddon and more.
The same damn thing happened with the Prophecy and Myrmidon. Sure, the new Myrm gained 1 more heavy drone... but the new Prophecy can do exactly what the old Myrmidon could do... only MUCH better. But I digress...

Solutions? Follow the paradigm between the Algos and Dragoon, the Vexor and Arbitrator. The Gallente can field more raw drone power and the Amarr have equal portions drones and utility.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#274 - 2013-04-08 23:13:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael Harari
ShahFluffers wrote:
After looking at the Armageddon and Dominix stats I must voice a certain degree of displeasure.

The problem: They both have pretty much the same damage dealing power.


Allow me to explain...

The Armageddon is overall better and more useful due to its ability to field heavy neutralizers with a range bonus. The 'Geddon also has more fitting options because of its vastly higher powergrid (which, to be fair, comes at the cost of CPU... but that can be more easily worked around).

The Dominix's new drone tracking and optimal bonus will certainly be useful in SOME situations (like station or gate camping) it's still gimmicky as it doesn't really give the ship any real tactical advantage in an actual battleship brawl (sentries and heavy drones don't have a problem tracking slow battleships... and they still won't be able to keep up with anything cruiser sized and/or speedy).


If these changes go through I will have little reason to go for a Dominix. The same functionality can be found in the Armageddon and more.
The same damn thing happened with the Prophecy and Myrmidon. Sure, the new Myrm gained 1 more heavy drone... but the new Prophecy can do exactly what the old Myrmidon could do... only MUCH better. But I digress...

Solutions? Follow the paradigm between the Algos and Dragoon, the Vexor and Arbitrator. The Gallente can field more raw drone power and the Amarr have equal portions drones and utility.


The dominix is much superior for large sentry fleets, with the range and tracking on sentries, it can use gardes out to about 90km, with 50% tracking bonus on them.

If anything, the domi is too strong, tracking and range bonused sentries will make mincemeat out of all sorts of things.
Pelea Ming
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#275 - 2013-04-08 23:13:38 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Vremennoi Omaristos wrote:
Why do I spend so much time studying lasers? And all branches Amar? Where do I apply them? And so it is, half the ship missile. If I wanted a rocket, I would have developed the Caldari, If the drone is Gallente. Instead of making less capo dependent, in my opinion. This is very annoying. In my many corporations are beginning to swing Matar branch *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal

Fortunately, though your english is broken, your point mostly makes it across, and as Ranger1 said in a previous post this very page, lets give it a little bit of time and see what hits Sisi, then we can all go and make up fits that prove our points and slam 'em with them so they fix things properly :)
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#276 - 2013-04-08 23:21:22 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Michael Harari wrote:
The dominix is much superior for large sentry fleets, with the range and tracking on sentries, it can use gardes out to about 90km, with 50% tracking bonus on them.

I rarely ever see a sentry fleet (or ship for that matter) unless it is camping a gate, a station, POS bashing, or a solo Ishtar.
In an actual battleship brawl you move to need get close to targets (because large blasters still require that you do) and mitigate some damage (if you stand still then you take more damage)... both of which force you to leave behind your drones (which a drone boat shouldn't do).

As for sniping with sentries... shouldn't sniper ships be aligned and moving in case someone gets the drop on them? Again, moving is still bad for sentries because they don't move themselves.

So forgive me if I consider sentry fleets a bit "gimmicky."
Gabriel Karade
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
#277 - 2013-04-08 23:35:15 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Gabriel Karade wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Gabriel Karade wrote:
The Amarr 'drone boat' brain bug needs to be killed with fire, period.

They are not the drone race, the Arbitrator (the first drone boat) was a 'quirk', nothing more, but recent CCP devs (i.e. the last couple years) seem to have allowed this brain bug to grow and grow... Straight

Quote:
The Arbitrator is unusual for Amarr ships in that it's primarily a drone carrier. While it is not the best carrier around, it has superior armor that gives it greater durability than most ships in its class.


Seriously, stop trampling 10 years of back story for quick gains.

Out of date flavor text aside, Amarr have ALWAYS heavily favored drones. Now if you choose to ignore this fact you'd still be left with the point that 2 missile and 2 drone races are a sound concept and emphasizing this is not a bad thing.

Diversity in your BS lines is a GOOD thing. It makes it more difficult to counter effectively.
Sorry mate but no - they haven't. Short history lesson for you:

The arbitrator was changed to a 'drone boat' in the first pass at cruiser rebalance a good few years ago (this was long after the days when the Thorax was *the* drone cruiser, fielding heavy drones...), but that has never been an Amarr thing until the very recent (in my terms) additions of recons with drones (fine, they are the T2 versions of the arbitrator), drone frigates (Sentinel? that was out of the blue), drone destroyers (ok, where'd that come from?), drone BC (seriously, what?) and now drone BS (no, just no…)

Gallente had the only line of ships that could field 15 (or in the case of the Moros, 35) drones. Perhaps I'm a 'bitter vet' (but I think 9 years of running two accounts entitles me to a pretty strong opinion on the matter...) but I really don't like this homogenising of racial doctrines, as a quick an easy fix to balance (perceived or otherwise) issues.

Amarr are, and have always been about shiny armour ships with lasers. You may think have a 2:2 format is a good idea, I think it’s pretty terrible when there is and always was, scope to keep 4 distinct racial doctrines.

I'm a beta pilot also, good to meet you. Smile
Now I may be getting a bit long in the tooth, but I don't seem to remember a time when drones weren't the Arbitrators primary weapons system. Perhaps you could provide a link to refresh my memory.

Recon ships, of course, don't go back that far... but they do go back several years. Certainly more than long enough to be considered a firm part of EvE lore.

Not that it matters that much to me. Frankly, since CCP created the lore (and still continues to do so) if they choose to say that Amarr has chosen to adopt a new secondary weapons system that is well within their purview... and 6 months later it wouldn't even raise an eyebrow.

By the way, I think you misunderstand. I never said their would or should be only 2 racial doctrines. I was referring to broad weapons groupings/trends that CCP lined lined out over a couple of years ago. They were pretty clear that while there would be considerable overlap that Amarr and Gallante would lean more towards drones, and that Minmatar and Caldari would lean more towards missiles (in very general terms).
Cruiser rebalance and the first Amarr 'drone ship':

http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=96354

Ok, ancient history, but I still intensely dislike the recent grouping of Amarr/Gallente (Drones) vs Caldari/Minmatar (missiles) and would rather see 4 distinct weapons groupings (you must recall, that even further back, Blasters and Rails were completely seperate, the former being Gallente, the latter being Caldari).

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

Evil Incarn8
Evil's League of Evil
#278 - 2013-04-08 23:35:16 UTC
Was there any thought put into these changes beyond fleet PvP?

I have looked through the thread for all 4 races and the reasoning listed in the dev posts only referances fleet PvP.

I suggest you look at your statistics / graphs and take a little look at where the majority of battleships get used, small hint for you, it is in highsec used for PvE.

Abaddon, you nerfed the tank, this was the main function of an Abaddon, huge active armour tank (yes active shock horror). The abaddon was slow but deliberate, the very living essance of Amarrian ship design.

Apocalypse, Since the release of the Abaddon sure this ship has seen its usefulness wane, who needs to target enemies beyond 50km anyway?

Armaggeddon, RIP, seriously wtf? I am going to rant at not only the murder of an iconic ship, but the apparent joy with which you are spreading the filth that is drone/cap warfare through the Amarrian ship docterine. I will spell this out for you, neut/vamp have precisely ZERO use for any PvE activity what-so-ever, so you have immediately reduced the geddon to a single bonused ship. Drones, ever since you applied the sleeper AI to missions drones are become their favourite food. You have added 5 missile hardpoints, why? this is an Amarrian ship Amarrians dont do missiles.
So you end up with a 5/2 split (unbonused) weapon system ship autocannons and torps on a geddon, just no.

So in summary,
Active armour tanks do get used,
Fleet PvP is a small part of your game for a small percentage of your playerbase,

Try to remember these things.
XSporkX
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#279 - 2013-04-08 23:35:45 UTC
I don't know about the rest of you guys but I'm psyched to see the battleships get shaken up a little, especially the geddon. I bet people moan about it for a little bit but the clever fellas are gonna spit out some creative fits. Very much looking forward to when this hits SiSi.
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#280 - 2013-04-08 23:47:29 UTC
Right, I have removed a lot of rule breaking posts and let some edge case stay. Please keep on topic and above all civil. Concise and polite replies to the proposed changes have a much higher change of getting trough than rants and swearwords.

The following rules have been broken:


2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.

3. Ranting is prohibited.

A rant is a post that is often filled with angry and counterproductive comments. A free exchange of ideas is essential to building a strong sense of community and is helpful in development of the game and community. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Please post your thoughts in a concise and clear manner while avoiding going off on rambling tangents.

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.

5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.


7. Use of profanity is prohibited.

The use of profanity is prohibited on the EVE Online forums. This includes the partial masking of letters using numbers or alternate symbols, and any attempts at bypassing the profanity filter.

12. Spamming is prohibited.

Spam is defined as the repetitive posting of the same topic or nonsensical post that has no substance and is often designed to annoy other forum users. This can include the words “first”, “go back to (insert other game name)” and other such posts that contribute no value to forum discussion. Spamming also includes the posting of ASCII art within a forum post.

22. Post constructively.

Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.

26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.

30. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.

CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, “outing” of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties.

Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts.

31. Rumor mongering is prohibited.

Rumor threads and posts which are based off no actual solid information and are designed to either troll or annoy other users will be locked and removed. These kinds of threads and posts are detrimental to the wellbeing and spirit of the EVE Online Community, and can create undue panic among forum users, as well as adding to the workload of our moderators.

34. Posting of kill reports outside of the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited.

More often than not, posts of this nature are made with inflammatory intent and are designed to promote trolling and flaming. Therefore, the posting of links to kill reports from any third party site, or the direct copy-pasting of kill reports from in game is prohibited on all forum channels of the EVE Online Forums, with the exception of the Crime & Punishment Channel.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)