DUST Search - [Feedback] Removing Vehicles from Ambush

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Feedback] Removing Vehicles from Ambush

» 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 - 1 post(s)

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 2233	Posted - 2014.06.09 06:56:00 - [1] - Quote This is sure to be a flammable topic. Here are a few of our reasons: 1) There is no Vehicle free mode - "Normal" TDM that most fps players are used to in other games 2) Public Ambush is farmed relentlessly by high level vehicle users 3) Many of our maps are simply not optimal for joint infantry - vehicle gameplay 4) Objective-based gameplay breeds more tactical gameplay, making it more likely that vehicles are used to capture and defend Objectives, while it is also more likely that infantry is able to counter vehicles with their own AV weapons. Please discuss and keep it civil, I am sure there will be a few disappointed vehicle users but we believe this is better for DUST 514 overall. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5995	Posted - 2014.06.09 07:14:00 - [2] - Quote This harkens back to the fact that Vehicles, without a clear cut role, are just better slayers. They essentially perform the same way as Infantry, only being immune to a large portion of the small arms in the game. Vehicles thrive in Ambush -because- there are no objectives. When the only thing you have to do is kill the enemy, it leads to power imbalances whenever a playstyle like tanks are implemented. By removing vehicles, it does certainly help the infantry a great deal but in the same sense, it also slaughters a lot of options for vehicle users who want to play a game-mode that utilizes what their specialization is all about: Makin' **** dead. I'm not necessarily for removing vehicles in Ambush because I think that it limits a player's playstyle and forces segregation artificially, but I can see the benefit of it being implemented. My considerations are that many of the maps, while not optimized for vehicle - Infantry play, aren't optimized for solely infantry play either. Many Ambush maps have -HUGE- stretches of space that have to be traveled just to get any sort of decent combat. Impact Ridge is especially bad about this. Ultimately, I don't think this is really going to make much adjustment to the game as a whole; it'll just force vehicle users to play in other game modes where the Vehicle vs AV balance will only rear it's ugly head even more as Skirmish/Domination still have higher vehicle caps. I think this proposal should wait until Hotfix Charlie so we have time to see the effects of changes made to that balance before we grab the cleaver and hack off a limb. Useful Links Aeon Amadi for CPM1
duster 35000 Algintal Core Gallente Federation 10	Posted - 2014.06.09 07:40:00 - [3] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: This is sure to be a flammable topic. Here are a few of our reasons: 1) There is no Vehicle free mode - "Normal" TDM that most fps players are used to in other games 2) Public Ambush is farmed relentlessly by high level vehicle users 3) Many of our maps are simply not optimal for joint infantry - vehicle gameplay 4) Objective-based gameplay breeds more tactical gameplay, making it more likely that vehicles are used to capture and defend Objectives, while it is also more likely that infantry is able to counter vehicles with their own AV weapons. Please discuss and keep it civil, I am sure there will be a few disappointed vehicle users but we believe this is better for DUST 514 overall. Yes, remove vehickes or add a infantry only ambush, as ambush should be infantry oriented if people want, then some stat padders like cough duna cough Jerrmy12 Banned, reason, hotfix alpha thread. No joke, the reason was a devs first post, I was linked to the first post.
Malkai Inos Any Given Day 1354	Posted - 2014.06.09 07:42:00 - [4] - Quote Agree with Aeon. Effectively excluding certain play stiles from a game mode doesn't sit well with me from a principal standpoint alone. Without vehicles, AV infantry has no reason to play ambush either, removing not one but two play stiles from ambush. The overall higher concentration of AV/Vehicle in Skirm/Dom can also have some stinging downsides such as pilots regularly getting their RDV requests denied (vehicle limit reached) wich constitutes a clear QoL loss for those affected. Dom/Skirm could also become more hostile to regular infantry because there's always someone just waiting for a friendly tanker to die so they can get their own tank out. You might end up switching the problem from one mode of another instead of fixing it i'm afraid. You can take a benign object, -you can take a cheeseburger and deconstruct it to its source...
duster 35000 Algintal Core Gallente Federation 10	Posted - 2014.06.09 07:47:00 - [5] - Quote Malkai Inos wrote: Agree with Aeon. Effectively excluding certain play stiles from a game mode doesn't sit well with me from a principal standpoint alone. Without vehicles, AV infantry has no reason to play ambush either, removing not one but two play stiles from ambush. The overall higher concentration of AV/Vehicle in Skirm/Dom can also have some stinging downsides such as pilots regularly getting their RDV requests denied (vehicle limit reached) wich constitutes a clear QoL loss for those affected. Dom/Skirm could also become more hostile to regular infantry because there's always someone just waiting for a friendly tanker to die so they can get their own tank out. You might end up switching the problem from one mode of another instead of fixing it i'm afraid. Ambush oms no vehicles? Or just lavs in ambush. Jerrmy12 Banned, reason, hotfix alpha thread. No joke, the reason was a devs first post, I was linked to the first post.
Meee One BATTLE SURVEY GROUP Dark Taboo 821	Posted - 2014.06.09 08:01:00 - [6] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: This is sure to be a flammable topic. Here are a few of our reasons: 1) There is no Vehicle free mode - "Normal" TDM that most fps players are used to in other games 2) Public Ambush is farmed relentlessly by high level vehicle users 3) Many of our maps are simply not optimal for joint infantry - vehicle gameplay 4) Objective-based gameplay breeds more tactical gameplay, making it more likely that vehicles are used to capture and defend Objectives, while it is also more likely that infantry is able to counter vehicles with their own AV weapons. Please discuss and keep it civil, I am sure there will be a few disappointed vehicle users but we believe this is better for DUST 514 overall. Vehicles wouldn't be such a problem if maps weren't designed to favor long range engagements. And if players could choose their deployment location when using "smart deploy" instead of being dropped right infront of a blaster HAV multiple times.
Spartan MK420 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 502	Posted - 2014.06.09 08:19:00 - [7] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: This is sure to be a flammable topic. Here are a few of our reasons: 1) There is no Vehicle free mode - "Normal" TDM that most fps players are used to in other games 2) Public Ambush is farmed relentlessly by high level vehicle users 3) Many of our maps are simply not optimal for joint infantry - vehicle gameplay 4) Objective-based gameplay breeds more tactical gameplay, making it more likely that vehicles are used to capture and defend Objectives, while it is also more likely that infantry is able to counter vehicles with their own AV weapons. Please discuss and keep it civil, I am sure there will be a few disappointed vehicle users but we believe this is better for DUST 514 overall. I agree. Remove them from Ambush, or give us another game mode, safe of vehicles, such as a FFA mode :P. Support Assault changes
Luther Mandrix WASTELAND JUNK REMOVAL Top Men. 257	Posted - 2014.06.09 08:34:00 - [8] - Quote have to have smaller maps or just the built up areas
DUST Fiend Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 14411	Posted - 2014.06.09 08:35:00 - [9] - Quote Yes x 1000000000000000000000000000.7
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 11044	Posted - 2014.06.09 08:45:00 - [10] - Quote I don't see why Ambush needs vehicles at all, they're a much better fit in Skirmish and Domination. There is no benefit to keeping them in Ambush, and there IS benefit to removing them. I won't complain if you keep them out of Ambush. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+

The dark cloud The Rainbow Effect 3210	Posted - 2014.06.09 08:51:00 - [11] - Quote I would say for balancing reasons you should splitt ambush OMS (80 clones) and regular ambush (50 clones). Allow vehicles in OMS and prohibit the usage of any vehicle in the regular variant. The reason behind this is that you can change out on supply depots for AV.
X7 lion Inner.Hell 209	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:00:00 - [12] - Quote maybe have a vechile hell mode, wehere you can only spawn in a tank or dropship maybe with a couple maps dedicated to tank game play and a couple to drop ships (with minor or specilized infantry gameplay) Hey look a distraction!
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 2239	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:14:00 - [13] - Quote I agree with the title of the thread. But please, make combat area tinier, we can't run across the map to pick a fight. Honestly i would divide again ambush and ambush OMS, no vehicle in ambush, vehicle in OMS. PSN: ogamega Never f* with a Galdari.
deezy dabest Sacred Initiative of Combat Killers 596	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:15:00 - [14] - Quote *Remove vehicles from Ambush but NOT* Ambush OMS.** If it is only in OMS I would even be a fan of bumping the quota up to 3. Supply depots hold much more tactical significance when vehicles are involved. Without tanks to pop them most of the blueberries will spend half the match sitting in one of the turrets. Off Map Support really does not even make sense if it does not include RDVs dropping in vehicles. Laser focused in a room full of mirrors. Everything you ever wanted coming SoonGäó just keep buying boosters.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4365	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:23:00 - [15] - Quote Malkai Inos wrote: Agree with Aeon. Effectively excluding certain playstyles from a game mode doesn't sit well with me from a principal standpoint alone. Without vehicles, AV infantry has no reason to play ambush either, removing not one but two playstyles from ambush. The overall higher concentration of AV/Vehicle in Skirm/Dom can also have some stinging downsides such as pilots regularly getting their RDV requests denied (vehicle limit reached) wich constitutes a clear QoL loss for those affected. Dom/Skirm could also become more hostile to regular infantry because there's always someone just waiting for a friendly tanker to die so they can get their own tank out. You might end up switching the problem from one mode of another instead of fixing it i'm afraid. That's a bullshit reason. There is no dedicated av infantry. That's not a useful battlefield role. AV should never be a persons only dedicated role. It's an emergency role for when your tankers have screwed up. The only exception are forge gunners who have been set up on high ground with a bunch of nanohives, because they can effectively suppress infantry from there as well. A silly publing running around with a proto swarm launcher will never contribute as much as even a militia tanker. You shouldn't be encouraging idiots to run around doing that. Removing tanks and ADS from ambush is a great idea.
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. 1595	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:23:00 - [16] - Quote Short response: Allowing hulking, neigh-unkillable death machines into a match where the only point of the match is to kill more than the other team ruins any balance there could be. If AV were capable of dealing with vehicles in a timely fashion it wouldn't be a big deal, but 30 seconds in-game is an eternity and it takes at least that long for 3 guys to drop a proper tanks health.... if they stick around long enough to let you do so since they can be on the other side of the map in 5 seconds. Bottom line, removing vehicles from ambush is a good move to make. PSN ID: AlbelNox2569 Cross Atu for CPM1
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5999	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:24:00 - [17] - Quote I want to remind everyone that there's an inherent flaw as well with wanting vehicles removed from Ambush but not Ambush OMS.... You can't choose which one you jump into. If I'm an infantry guy who wants to play a game-mode without vehicles, it's not going to help anything leaving it up to chance - I'm likely to just leave the match and get frustrated that I have to wait in a que again (assuming I don't get thrown into the same match I just left). The thing about it guys, is that you have to consider this from both ends of the spectrum. Yes, vehicles are powerful and wanting them removed from Ambush is totally understandable but it's a DIRECT and CLEAR impact on another player's playstyle. If he spent all his SP into vehicles, than removing them from play is practically invalidating all of that SP investment. I'm not cool with that, at all. Useful Links Aeon Amadi for CPM1
Zatara Rought General Tso's Alliance 3360	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:30:00 - [18] - Quote I'm down with removing vehicles from ambush. I'm also a huge proponent of Dark Cloud's assertion to keep them in OMS because supply depots. Giving the option for OMS to continue vehicles vs regular ambush to have none is a suggestion that (for me) satisfies Aeon's concerns about doing 2 much 2 soon. My only issue with the idea of having vehicles in OMS is that supply depots are targeted immediately by vehicles for destruction, and once down it's **. The simple fact is 2 vehicle users in ambush will ** the other team due to the spawn system and the mechanics around getting your own vehicles in. (Trying to get a derp on the ground to get links on high ground to PREVENT getting raped by tanks on the ground just leads to frustration if the tanks are anywhere near competent) But I forsee for myself a huge interest in being able to decide between ambush and OMS if the difference if vehicles. I don't want to have to quit out of battles and re-search because I'm solo and I don't want to have to find a squad with the proper prerequisites that allows me to counter play the tanks of ambush. CEO of FA, Candidate for CPM1 Follow me on twitter Skype Zatara.Rought
deezy dabest Sacred Initiative of Combat Killers 596	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:30:00 - [19] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: I want to remind everyone that there's an inherent flaw as well with wanting vehicles removed from Ambush but not Ambush OMS.... You can't choose which one you jump into. If I'm an infantry guy who wants to play a game-mode without vehicles, it's not going to help anything leaving it up to chance - I'm likely to just leave the match and get frustrated that I have to wait in a que again (assuming I don't get thrown into the same match I just left). The thing about it guys, is that you have to consider this from both ends of the spectrum. Yes, vehicles are powerful and wanting them removed from Ambush is totally understandable but it's a DIRECT and CLEAR impact on another player's playstyle. If he spent all his SP into vehicles, than removing them from play is practically invalidating all of that SP investment. I'm not cool with that, at all. I did consider this and almost said it in my post but remembered that would probably require a client update. My final thought on it was that it would likely drive the tank spammers into skirm or dom leaving the playstyle in OMS to casual tankers and LAVs making OMS not hugely different from regular ambush. If we remove vehicles from OMS then installations should go as well. Between people camping on installations and constant fighting over the installations it would really invalidate how ambush is suppose to work in my opinion. Laser focused in a room full of mirrors. Everything you ever wanted coming SoonGäó just keep buying boosters.
Joseph Ridgeson warravens Final Resolution. 1979	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:49:00 - [20] - Quote I say yes, but allow LAV's. Some maps are stupidly large and being an out of position heavy is horrendously annoying. Even though it will segment the community even more so, it is worth it. "This is B.S! This is B.S! I paid money! Cash money, dollars money, cash money!"

Floyd20 Azizora L.O.T.I.S. 49	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:56:00 - [21] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: This is sure to be a flammable topic. Here are a few of our reasons: 1) There is no Vehicle free mode - "Normal" TDM that most fps players are used to in other games 2) Public Ambush is farmed relentlessly by high level vehicle users 3) Many of our maps are simply not optimal for joint infantry - vehicle gameplay 4) Objective-based gameplay breeds more tactical gameplay, making it more likely that vehicles are used to capture and defend Objectives, while it is also more likely that infantry is able to counter vehicles with their own AV weapons. Please discuss and keep it civil, I am sure there will be a few disappointed vehicle users but we believe this is better for DUST 514 overall. let standard ambush be vehicle free, and oms have current limits. let players choose which they want to play. maybe limit to 1 tank per side if possible.
deezy dabest Sacred Initiative of Combat Killers 596	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:57:00 - [22] - Quote Adding some maps where the redline basically restricts you to the large socket of the map and a small surrounding area to allow for flanking would be a good way to supplement this. I am only guessing that redlines and smart deploy points can be adjusted server side. Laser focused in a room full of mirrors. Everything you ever wanted coming SoonGäó just keep buying boosters.
DAMIOS82 warravens Final Resolution. 125	Posted - 2014.06.09 09:59:00 - [23] - Quote I say no, Ambush is about killing, not objectives and as a HAV driver i should be able to choose what to play. But i do understand it from the point of view of infantry. The problem lies in that the AV weapons need to be better balanced, not saying they should go back to there old level, but that is what takes the fun away, not whether there are vehicles. If AV weapons are at a level where they have effect, but are not 1 kill or overkill weapons. Then at one point or the other the vehicles would decrease a little bit or atleast you would have a way to fight back.
Sole Fenychs Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 491	Posted - 2014.06.09 10:09:00 - [24] - Quote I think it would be good to block LAVs from Ambush. This prevents blueberries from filling the two vehicle slots that could be filled by actual AV vehicles like tanks. Actually, would it be possible to make three Ambush game modes? OMS would be like it currently is. Vehicle and infantry combined, with infrastructure providing semi-objectives. The other two would be a pure infantry mode and a version of Ambush where weapons are locked for thirty seconds after the initial spawn, to make initial vehicle spawns possible. In that latter mode, vehicle limit is raised to six or more and it's explicitly titled as Tankbush. Basically, I want to have a pilot-based Ambush game mode introduced, where tanks are murdering each other. It would serve an additional function of good vehicle on vehicle balance feedback. The perfect vehicle playground, where squads of proto stompers go to murder other proto stompers and the occasional inexperienced blueberry. Note that this would require the ability to disable tankbush in the match finder. Is that even possible?
MINA Longstrike 843	Posted - 2014.06.09 10:23:00 - [25] - Quote Vehicle players come to ambush for a few reasons - not 'just' to slaughter infantry 1) shorter matches put your investment at less risk 2) less vehicles make it easier to establish 'dominance' once again putting your investment at less risk 3) keeping an enemy scattered or preventing them from organizing once again means that your investment is at less risk 4) the lack of 'objectives' prevents people from having things to rally around (other than defensible locations and its always better to be on the offends in ambush) which ones again leads to putting your vehicle investment at less risk. Notice the common theme here? Most vehicle users are using this game mode to avoid some of the extremely prohibitive costs associated with current game mods and vehicle balance - you can have 15m sp into vehicles and it doesn't matter because any idiot with a sica and 2 damage mods can blow your 300-400k tank or 700k isk dropship up in 3 shots. Though due to rep speed on 3x rep madrugars your practically invulnerable to infantry. Ambush vehicle play is a symptom of currently existing design issues, not the problem itself. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
anaboop Dem Durrty Boyz General Tso's Alliance 89	Posted - 2014.06.09 10:24:00 - [26] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: This is sure to be a flammable topic. Here are a few of our reasons: 1) There is no Vehicle free mode - "Normal" TDM that most fps players are used to in other games 2) Public Ambush is farmed relentlessly by high level vehicle users 3) Many of our maps are simply not optimal for joint infantry - vehicle gameplay 4) Objective-based gameplay breeds more tactical gameplay, making it more likely that vehicles are used to capture and defend Objectives, while it is also more likely that infantry is able to counter vehicles with their own AV weapons. Please discuss and keep it civil, I am sure there will be a few disappointed vehicle users but we believe this is better for DUST 514 overall. The main problem I see is if all infantry go ambush and only vehicle users goto the rest, dropships will have literally nothing to target but other vehicles or the odd infantry in dom skirmish, put simply not enough players for this. You may as well remove all vehicles completely. av skills, vehicle skills, turrent skills will be useless. Players that just dont want to deal with vehicles altogether will just run ambush and not have to worry them. What if vehicles damage is reduced by 50% while in ambush modes? Or something along those lines. This idea is basically alienating vehicle users to fight amoungst themselves. Fully sick Anaboop trading card
Moonracer2000 Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 809	Posted - 2014.06.09 10:32:00 - [27] - Quote I am all for vehicle free ambush. If people are divided, is it possible to set aside one or two battle servers (or however you do things) for a vehicle free mode? Maybe put it in the special contracts section if that can be done server side. Then you can see if that mode is more popular. Or just do it for hotfix Bravo and if people don't like it, revert back for hotfix Charlie.
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Proficiency V. 1433	Posted - 2014.06.09 10:36:00 - [28] - Quote I AGREE WITH REMOVING VEHICLES COMPLETELY FROM REGULAR AMBUSH AND AMBUSH OMS Quote: While the player that participates in any anti-vehicle gameplay is completely handicapped against infantry the vehicle player suffers from no such handicap while going anti-infantry with vehicles. REASONING In ambush the only purpose is to kill other mercs. When a vehicle can kill more mercs than another player that is not in a vehicle and at the same time it takes more than 3 people to effectively deal with one vehicle; you have a lopsided event. Now it is true that both teams have the ability to call out to vehicles which, in theory, would make things fair but, do to the state of matchmaking and the first come first serve nature of calling out vehicles; ambush matches tend to be lopsided. In this there is also the economical capabilities of each player and corp where some have been farming PC and other have not for x or y reason, some can afford aurum gear and some cannot. Hence this creates a match type that has it's fate decided most times by who can call out tanks first and who can call more tanks out again and again when lost. THE NUMBERS GAME Now imaging a match where 1 tank is pulled out. That same tanks needs at least 3 people to kill it if not more. Now those same three people that came out to to destroy the vehicle eliminate the clone killing potential of a team simply to nullify the increased killing potential of the enemy team. The result is a net loss in mercenary killing potential while the enemy team has no net loss in killing potential. Furthermore that tank is also getting support from other infantry trying to kill the av guys which are left very handicapped to defend themselves. TACTICS/u] We also have to include the fact that the matches usually don't have a way to refit for tactical purposes. Some might say what about AMBUSH OMS and I would say you are right, that game mode has a possibility for tactical refit but if you have played these type of matches you notice that the Supply depots are usually slaughterhouses where the team who has the vehicles can farm the poor souls trying to refit to deal with him. Hence the whole idea of having a vehicle in this game mode creates the same situation; whoever has vehicles wins by default a great majority of the times. THAT SMART DEPLOY THOUGH The vehicle thing wouldn't be half as bad if you actually stood a chance at spawning at a decent point but smart deploy only give you the usual two types of spawns. Either you spawn in front of all that infantry or maybe in front of a blaster tank that is somehow already shooting you are you spawn all the way across the map where you are absolutely no good at you job be it AV or anti-infantry. [u]CONCLUSION Vehicles have no play in ambush or ambush OMS. While the player that participates in any anti-vehicle gameplay is completely handicapped against infantry the vehicle player suffers from no such handicap while going anti-infantry with vehicles. This makes so that the statistical outcome of a match is usually ruled by either the best tank or the guy who can pull the most tanks out. Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
anaboop Dem Durrty Boyz General Tso's Alliance 89	Posted - 2014.06.09 10:45:00 - [29] - Quote Giving vehicles a clone amount like dropsuit clones, once it runs out no more vehicles can be called in, although this may cause for a lack of better words dicktards to spam vehicles ruining it for everyone else, or delay of 2 minutes per vehicle called out per person with a vehicle clone. Fully sick Anaboop trading card
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3432	Posted - 2014.06.09 10:47:00 - [30] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Vehicle players come to ambush for a few reasons - not 'just' to slaughter infantry 1) shorter matches put your investment at less risk 2) less vehicles make it easier to establish 'dominance' once again putting your investment at less risk 3) keeping an enemy scattered or preventing them from organizing once again means that your investment is at less risk 4) the lack of 'objectives' prevents people from having things to rally around (other than defensible locations and its always better to be on the offends in ambush) which ones again leads to putting your vehicle investment at less risk. Notice the common theme here? Most vehicle users are using this game mode to avoid some of the extremely prohibitive costs associated with current game mods and vehicle balance - you can have 15m sp into vehicles and it doesn't matter because any idiot with a sica and 2 damage mods can blow your 300-400k tank or 700k isk dropship up in 3 shots. Though due to rep speed on 3x rep madrugars your practically invulnerable to infantry. Ambush vehicle play is a symptom of currently existing design issues, not the problem itself. This. I run a railgun in ambush a lot of the time. When I do I almost always end up with fewer than ten kills, usually less than five. The same when I'm using missiles (I don't use blasters these days). Slaying just isn't my priority in ambush, tbh. I usually spend my time tank hunting. I would be overjoyed with the removal of tanks from 'bush were another vehicle-only game type added. Were there no silver lining of that sort, I would be very disappointed at the negation of one-quarter of my SP (including AV) in one- third of the game. BlowoutForCPM



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 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 OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 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, OMG Labs. 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.

BlowoutForCPM