EVE Search - Blaster tracking with graphs

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Blaster tracking with graphs

» 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 .. 12 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
ropnes	Posted - 2009.10.04 17:36:00 - [31] The BS weapons aren't the only weapons Look at Light Neutrons Their damage window is smaller, they barely do more damage. Against someone with an AB they're fked With blasters you can only engage in a very small range spectrum and you're more sensitive to speed. On sub-BS ships the extra damage is far from enough. In how many situations do you have 10 seconds to change ammo types? If lasers are supposed to be so good at mid range then blasters need to be significantly better at short range, and they're not
Jack Icegaard The Omega Project	Posted - 2009.10.04 17:40:00 - [32] I made some graphs to illustrate the difference in performance envelope between blasters and pulse lasers. In the graphs i compare standardized damage output of a Megathron with full rack of Neutron Blaster Cannon II vs an Armageddon with a full rack of Mega Pulse Lasers II. The target is a Drake with 3xLSE + 3x shield rigs IE sig radius 406. I compare with all skills at level 5. Note that the graphs shows the envelope where either ship does more damage than the other. White areas is where both ships do equal damage. Also note that the colors does not indicate absolute damage but the difference in damage output. This graph shows best short range faction ammo IE Caldari Navy Antimatter and Amarr Navy Multifrequency. The white border between the two colored areas is where both ships have equal damage output. The left colored area shows advantage for the Megathron and the right shows the advantage for the Armageddon. This graph compares Null with Scorch. Note that Huge difference in advantage: I also made a graph where i compare Null with Amarr Navy Multifrequency. The advantage here is for the Armageddon. The Megathron does some more damage at range due to greater falloff and also have a small advantage in close range/high transversal. Its just scratching the paintjob though.
Norris Packard Wings of Redemption Black Flag Alliance	Posted - 2009.10.04 17:41:00 - [33] Originally by: Trigos Trilobi I don't quite get how anyone could suggest blasters need a tracking boost based on those graphs, unless they assume the standard combat scenario is a dead still blaster bs trying to shoot a max speed bs on perfect orbit and neither have webs. That's why I said the speed scale is somewhat poorly chosen, 100m/s or even 50m/s transversal speed in a bs vs bs scenario inside web range is just not very relevant. The speed differences (and therefore maximum theoretical orbit speeds as well) fall somewhere in the 10-20m/s range, and at those transversals blasters hit just fine. At cruiser level likewise, the 200m/s+ graphs, while looking ugly, aren't that meaningful. Even the 100m/s graph describes a rare situation and the most interesting graph is the 50m/s one where blasters, again, have no significant trouble. I just don't see how any reasonable tracking boost would achieve anything useful, and a lot of the cries for more tracking sound a lot like people are just unhappy that they can't hit smaller ship classes anymore. Optimal is another big no, considering especially on bs level acs are already pushed past point range. Some more damage would probably be fine, 15% maybe to compensate for the upcoming ac ammo changes and then some. And, pulses obviously need a huge tracking nerf, but that's another matter. I like this idea the damage boost is more what the blasters need not a tracking boost, tracking will just make the blasters overpowered agaisnt smaller targets.
kyrieee Brutal Deliverance Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2009.10.04 17:45:00 - [34] Nice If you're using MatLab, try: shading interp; (to get rid of the grid, you can add a less dense one later if you want) and if you get glitches from the origin try: lighting phong;
Jack Icegaard The Omega Project	Posted - 2009.10.04 18:27:00 - [35] Originally by: kyrieee Nice If you're using MatLab, try: shading interp; (to get rid of the grid, you can add a less dense one later if you want) and if you get glitches from the origin try: lighting phong; Yes, i used MatLab. I should have removed the grid but I'm too lazy to upload the images again
Jack Icegaard The Omega Project	Posted - 2009.10.04 19:20:00 - [36] To sum up what can be deduced from the graphs: ANMF have null completely covered. The advantage for the Megathron is strictly inside 10km. Nothing new there.. So the old question is if the advantage of the Megathron inside of 10km is large enough to compensate for the ability to, without delay, project damage out to 50 km. What my first graph illustrate is that the advantage of the Megathron inside of 10 km is rather small. Only in the high transversal area does the Mega significantly more damage. On the other hand, if there is a high probability that the Megathron can keep the target inside of web range for the duration of the fight, then the range advantage of the Armageddon is moot.
Spooks'em	Posted - 2009.10.04 19:29:00 - [37] Edited by: Spooks''em on 04/10/2009 19:30:00 Originally by: Jack Icegaard Originally by: kyrieee Nice If you're using MatLab, try: shading interp; (to get rid of the grid, you can add a less dense one later if you want) and if you get glitches from the origin try: lighting phong; Yes, i used MatLab. I should have removed the grid but I'm too lazy to upload the images again Although, I am surprised and happy that someone seemed to have listened to some of my comments that grid is a little harsh. Also, a color gradient split more clearly along the damage advantage would be more useful. So maybe differing shades of green/blue for where the mega has the advantage, white where the difference is ~0, and yello/red for where the geddon dominates. Finally, a color scale is a must.
Laur Khal	Posted - 2009.10.04 20:44:00 - [38] While I agree that blasters need a small damage and optimal buff, it seems pretty clear that the biggest imbalance issue here is Scorch and instant crystal switching.
Roemy Schneider Vanishing Point.	Posted - 2009.10.04 23:34:00 - [39] not exactly an objective selection of graphs: either you're looking at hit chance or "standardized dps", dropping the 25% damage bonus. this gets really bad with the small turrets where the 7.5% tracking bonuses got skipped. apart from that, the graphs still clearly show how blaster can be vastly superior; even without a tracking bonus: once they're are up close, tracking is on their side. looking at your standardized-dps-graph for 100m/s orbit, that's what? 75% for multispec pulses and 90 for blasters? again, one has to add 25% damage bonus which even the dominix has, bringing us to an effective 112.5% then.... what about the kin/thm damage vs em/thm argument? that'd be standardized. antimatter l raw: 48 // antimatter vs non-racial t1 armor resists: 34 mutli l raw: 48 // multi vs non-racial t1 armor resists: 27 == 25.9% more effective damage [and this number only changes in favor of lasers if the gallente shoots a caldari armor tank. mhmm.] adding that to the previous number, we now have 141.667% for blasters vs 75% multispec @ 500m orbit doing 100m/s and that's before drones. and yes, we have always included minnie explo damage in their dps discussions; they still sucked [and, btw, will continue to do so] ps: i was neutral in this whole blaster discussion before the trolls joined the party. threads, or rather, interpretations like these drive me over to the other side. - putting the gist back into logistics
ropnes	Posted - 2009.10.05 00:11:00 - [40] Edited by: ropnes on 05/10/2009 00:11:45 Geddon also has a 25% DPS bonus you know And I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'vastly superior'

Jack Icegaard The Omega Project	Posted - 2009.10.05 00:34:00 - [41] Originally by: ropnes Edited by: ropnes on 05/10/2009 00:11:45 Geddon also has a 25% DPS bonus you know And I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'vastly superior' I don't think he means the Mega vs Geddon comparison but some of the graphs early in this thread. What else to say about people who by their own admission base their opinion on game balance matters, not solely on the state of the game itself, but also who they think is trolling the forum? It sounds a little juvenile to me.
Roemy Schneider Vanishing Point.	Posted - 2009.10.05 02:02:00 - [42] i know, i know... tracking graphs look like they're hugging each other but by vastly superior i mean this: for a 5km orbit for a 1km orbit add/substract some percents to your liking, it can't skew that picture fine, include your geddon bonus then. still leaves the 29% advantage when using effective dps regarding armor resistances. - putting the gist back into logistics
Etho Demerzel Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone	Posted - 2009.10.05 04:34:00 - [43] Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 05/10/2009 04:43:20 Originally by: Roemy Schneider fine, include your geddon bonus then. still leaves the 29% advantage when using effective dps regarding armor resistances. Sorry, but 29% in your head. Open EFT, select ANY ship, make damage profiles for hybrids (60% kin, 40% thermal) and Lasers (60% EM, 40% Thermal), and check the difference in EHP. It is usually negligible, or at the best 5-10%. You forget that a LOT of the buffer comes from Shield and Hull, even if you armor tank. Even if you consider pure Armor resists you have in average 25% and not 29%, unless you are fighting minmatar(higher EM resist). Against Caldari and Amarr it is 25% and against gallente, it is 20%. Now if you consider SHIELD average resists, which amount for about half the ships that pvp in this game, and the majority of sub-battleship fittings, lasers have a huge damage type advantage of 35%. And the geddon bonus to dps is a 25% RoF bonus which amounts to a 33% dps bonus btw, not 25%. And one more thing. Yes, blasters are slightly superior at VERY close range (as in 20% more dps). Thing is they should be overwhelmingly superior at this range, to compensate for the 300% range advantage of pulse lasers. You want to keep your 300% of additional range, fine, give blasters 300% more damage at point blank and we have a deal. ===== "If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron...
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.10.05 08:55:00 - [44] Excellent thread demonstrating the severe shortcomings (no pun intended) of blasters across all three sizes. The people picking on the graphs and accusing the OP of making them biased are doing so simply because they can't find anything else to argue with about the data. It's too overwhelmingly obvious that blasters aren't competitive with lasers. I fly both laser and blaster ships with max skills and can freely choose which one I use for PVP. Actually, I can fly all four races equally well, but that's not the point. Whenever I'm out soloing or in a two man gang or so, I depend more on an MWD to get me to the target's wreck to loot, to get me back to gates and to get me out of trouble. Because of this, and the Hype's 5th mid for a sensor booster (so I can actually catch targets) I end up using Blasterthrons or Hypes, even though I'd rather use an Abaddon or Geddon. Let me reiterate: I'm stuck using blaster ships even though they suck when compared to laser ships, the only reason being that I simply need that MWD and 5th mid slot for the type of fighting I typically do (solo, on the offensive, trying to ensure I get that initial tackle). If I could get a similar package like the Hype, only using lasers, I'd never use blasters, EVER. Right now blasters suck, they fail, they're crap. Most seasoned blastership pilots succeed not because blasters 'still work ok' but because they're very good pilots with max skills, implants and expensive ships and usually engage pilots with half the SP and half the ISK invested in their ship/pod. Does this make them bad pilots? Of course not, they're fighting within their limitations. Blasters need at good 50% DPS advantage over lasers inside their optimal range. They need to do HUGE damage close up. They already do fail damage at medium-long range. All that's needed is a straight damage increase, leaving everything else the same. The tracking problems of blasters ensure that blaster pilots will never see the theoretical peak DPS numbers anyway. And everyone can just stop with the drone argument. There are plenty of ships with just as much or more drone space than Gallente ships. It's also amusing to note that while everyone keeps comparing the Geddon and the Mega they seem to forget that the Mega is a TIER TWO BS while the Geddon is a TIER ONE BS. Look at the armor EHP of the Navy Geddon and it's peak DPS and range with Megapulse IIs and then compare that to a Navy Mega with Neutron IIs and a comparable fit/tank. You'll see that the Geddon does 95% of the Mega's DPS, but with a 1000% increase in range, and for less ISK. The OP is dead on with his analysis of blasters. The math and graphs simply confirm what long time blaster users have 'felt' all along; that intuitive knowledge that blasters just simply aren't as effective as they should be. -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Tier 5 Battleships
Isil Rahsen Gallente Ferrum Superum	Posted - 2009.10.05 09:08:00 - [45] Originally by: Bellum Eternus words This. Damage boost for great justice.
Roemy Schneider Vanishing Point.	Posted - 2009.10.05 13:43:00 - [46] srsly BE...? Quote: I depend more on an MWD to get me to the target's wreck to loot, to get me back to gates and to get me out of trouble yes, that's the other part. but if you don't use your MWD for charging at the the enemy and to get into 10.8km range, then that's hardly a reason to boost blasters. but allow me to spam some graphs that are a little closer to reality: [Megathron, Neutrons] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Adaptive Nano Plating II Adaptive Nano Plating II Damage Control II Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800 Stasis Webifier II Warp Scrambler II 100MN MicroWarpdrive II Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Heavy Unstable Power Fluctuator I Large Ancillary Current Router I Large Trimark Armor Pump I Large Trimark Armor Pump I Ogre II x5 -- 832 turret-dps + 317 ogre-dps 100k uniform eHP, 64.3k on armor 23.4k on hull 400m sig [Armageddon, New Setup 1] 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Internal Force Field Array I Adaptive Nano Plating II Adaptive Nano Plating II Reactor Control Unit II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Quad LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800 Faint Warp Disruptor I Heavy Unstable Power Fluctuator I Mega Pulse Laser II, Amarr Navy Multifrequency L Mega Pulse Laser II, Amarr Navy Multifrequency L Mega Pulse Laser II, Amarr Navy Multifrequency L Mega Pulse Laser II, Amarr Navy Multifrequency L Mega Pulse Laser II, Amarr Navy Multifrequency L Mega Pulse Laser II, Amarr Navy Multifrequency L Mega Pulse Laser II, Amarr Navy Multifrequency L Large Trimark Armor Pump I Large Trimark Armor Pump I Large Trimark Armor Pump I Ogre II x5 -- 760 turret-dps + 317 ogre-dps 102k uniform eHP, 73.1k on armor 18.5k on hull 370m sig yesyes i'm sure you'll be eagerly smacking the platings ----------------- mega's 832 turet-dps split into 485 kin and 347 thm. running that through armor resistances leaves us with 210.6+130.3=340.9 armor removed every second. call that effective dps or w/e you want... geddon's 760 split into 443 emp and 317 thm. armor resistances again result in 128.1+119.1=247.2 ogres on armor is 119dps. yes, while hybrids vs hull make little difference, lasers do enjoy the lower em resistances there. however, once we look at the damage graph, you'll notice why it won't come to that if you know how to fly blaster ships: transv-v = 100m/s btw i'm sure eve players have enough brains to not need my interpretations. but allow me to point out ~350dps for the mega vs ~210dps for the geddon at the marked spots. anywhere from 1500m to 2500m should still be quite a comfy superiority and will result in a win before the mega hits structure. "butbutbut... if the webbed geddon tries to keep longer range or approaches while the mega orbits... that's more like 50m/s transversal" i agree: - putting the gist back into logistics
Jack Icegaard The Omega Project	Posted - 2009.10.05 14:13:00 - [47] Edited by: Jack Icegaard on 05/10/2009 14:15:27 Originally by: Roemy Schneider graphs etc.. Funny, did you say trolling? In your first post you ramble about how the OP have skewed the comparison to make blaster look bad and how that affected your opinion in this subject. Then you present your own graphs which are pretty much a schoolbook example of biased argumentation. You can find any number of ship vs ship situations where one ship will have a huge advantage due to the ability to take advantage of weaker resist. Such comparison have very little bearing on the balance of the involved weapon systems.
Roemy Schneider Vanishing Point.	Posted - 2009.10.05 14:24:00 - [48] i have no idea what you're talking about. could you be any cloudier? maybe an example perhaps - putting the gist back into logistics
Jack Icegaard The Omega Project	Posted - 2009.10.05 14:29:00 - [49] Edited by: Jack Icegaard on 05/10/2009 14:31:04 Originally by: Roemy Schneider Edited by: Roemy Schneider on 05/10/2009 14:27:57 i have no idea what you're talking about. could you be any cloudier? maybe an example perhaps, plz. do you want me to use other lenses, ones with more thm damage but lower dps? other drones? i can do all that. is it the nano platings? feel free to mention any two setups Find a ship with a large hole in explosive resist. Match it vs a artillery BS at sufficient range. Use the matchup to demonstrate the awesomeness of artillery turrets.
Roemy Schneider Vanishing Point.	Posted - 2009.10.05 14:31:00 - [50] does it have to be good ole' doomsday proof? - putting the gist back into logistics

Suas Perkone	Posted - 2009.10.05 14:36:00 - [51] Edited by: Suas on 05/10/2009 14:36:29 BAD Blaster users are the biggest babies in EVE. _________________________ HELLO! My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. PREPARE TO DIE!
Jack Icegaard The Omega Project	Posted - 2009.10.05 14:57:00 - [52] Originally by: Roemy Schneider does it have to be good ole' doomsday proof? The idea I'm trying to convey here is that if you want to factor in resist you have to demonstrate that one type of damage is preferable over another for a very broad spectra of probable targets. Only in that context is the resistance relevant for balance. Arguing in detail about specific match ups and fittings is futile. Note that the Drake i used was solely for the purpose of the sig radius.
Petra Katell Pator Tech School	Posted - 2009.10.05 15:00:00 - [53] Originally by: Suas Edited by: Suas on 05/10/2009 14:36:29 BAD Blaster users are the biggest babies in EVE. ahh yes, Intigo, god's gift to PVP (lol) that doesn't fly blaster ships. The initial graphs display the huge disadvantages blasters have. It's pretty clear the they need a DPS boost and a slight optimal increase.
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.05 15:05:00 - [54] Just posting to say this is an awesome treasure trove of information. Going to take me more time than I have at the moment to sift through it and form an opinion, though. Fantastic job Kyrieee. Keep the real data comin'.
Roemy Schneider Vanishing Point.	Posted - 2009.10.05 15:13:00 - [55] Originally by: Jack Icegaard Originally by: Roemy Schneider does it have to be good ole' doomsday proof? The idea I'm trying to convey here is that if you want to factor in resist you have to demonstrate that one type of damage is preferable over another for a very broad spectra of probable targets. Only in that context is the resistance relevant for balance. Arguing in detail about specific match ups and fittings is futile. Note that the Drake i used was solely for the purpose of the sig radius. ah so you're saying you want blaster to be the one ship to pwn them all...? cause i don't see how i could change the damage type on either of them, apart from drones - but if i go for berserkers, you'll be all over me with those ~10k eHP shields. should i run both against an explo-torp spewing raven then? - putting the gist back into logistics
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2009.10.05 15:47:00 - [56] Edited by: The Djego on 05/10/2009 15:56:47 Originally by: Roemy Schneider stuff Orbiting doesn¦t work at all on the BS vs BS level, not even in a 1o1 if you don¦t fight someone without a web that is also this fair to leave his ship speed at 0m/s. By orbiting you will fast lose range to the ship that moves away from you and the other ship will hit as good as you do in general. Also it is impossible to beat a skilled Gedon in a mega without droping to structure(even before QR, if he is not plated up to **, meaning doing a low dps and you run a very haeavy active tank), since you need to get in range(even as low as starting within 20km it takes 25-30 seconds to speed up, move, slow down) and overcome the EHP advantage of the gedon first, the effective DPS advantage after this both things is basicly gone. This statement is about a 3 trimarked Mega, nobody that doesn¦t want to fit LAR + Heavy cap booster fits a ACR, you simply drop the heavy cap booster to a med one. In any fight that involves more than 2-3 ships all this things are also compleetly meaningless, since you will have more than one web on you and one ship will die long before you will reach and hold the orbit(what you can¦t) -> no advantage at all. The tracking diffrence between puls and blasters is far to small to create any meaningfull effect at all, most of the time. If you can¦t hit something properly with puls the same stands true for blasters. If you can hit stuff with blasters, you will be able to hit with puls to. The only advantage is the higher mobility, but that isn¦t a advantage if it doesn¦t make sense to hunt stuff down that you can¦t hit properly(you don¦t want to have a frig or a Cruiser in web range with a Mega, because you can kill them far quicker out of it) or get compleetly imobilized by tacklers you can¦t kill quick. Having the better range and higher EHP in the start is consideralbe better in most parts of the current gameplay on the BS level. Originally by:** Bellum Eternus Blasters need at good 50% DPS advantage over lasers inside their optimal range. They need to do HUGE damage close up. They already do fail damage at medium-long range. All that's needed is a straight damage increase, leaving everything else the same. The tracking problems of blasters ensure that blaster pilots will never see the theoretical peak DPS numbers anyway. I disagree. Why improve the throw away dps support blasterships or RR Mega that work with gang tackle allready? A better web would do far more good to the solo and small gang blastership in general and give it back his bite. Yes it lacks a bit dps, but it did pre QR as well, the main diffrence it was able to hold his ground against next to any possible target at close range. That is flexibilty that it lost and can¦t be fixed with DPS or a bit tracking. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Sinderblock Caldari Red Federation	Posted - 2009.10.05 15:58:00 - [57] Originally by: Jack Icegaard Edited by: Jack Icegaard on 05/10/2009 14:31:04 Originally by: Roemy Schneider Edited by: Roemy Schneider on 05/10/2009 14:27:57 i have no idea what you're talking about. could you be any cloudier? maybe an example perhaps, plz. do you want me to use other lenses, ones with more thm damage but lower dps? other drones? i can do all that. is it the nano platings? feel free to mention any two setups Find a ship with a large hole in explosive resist. Match it vs a artillery BS at sufficient range. Use the matchup to demonstrate the awesomeness of artillery turrets. Maybe I'm confused but the standard armor resist package is 2x EANM, and 1xDCU II right? Thrm Kin will always be better to shoot at armor tanks then EM Thrm (except for perhaps gallente t1 resists) and most battleships field armor tanks its not like she picked some kind of special case or something, blasters hit better resist holes vs armor tanks it is just a fact.
Etho Demerzel Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone	Posted - 2009.10.05 16:19:00 - [58] Originally by: Sinderblock Maybe I'm confused but the standard armor resist package is 2x EANM, and 1xDCU II right? Thrm Kin will always be better to shoot at armor tanks then EM Thrm (except for perhaps gallente t1 resists) and most battleships field armor tanks its not like she picked some kind of special case or something, blasters hit better resist holes vs armor tanks it is just a fact. Your assumptions: 1) Everything is armor tanked 2) Everthing is battleship sized 3) Everything is T1 4) Shield and Hull are irrelevant in armor tanked ships All 4 assumptions are wrong btw. ===== "If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron...
BiggestT Caldari Amarrian Retribution	Posted - 2009.10.05 16:20:00 - [59] Edited by: BiggestT on 05/10/2009 16:25:01 Originally by: Roemy Schneider bias Those graphs are so biased its ridiculous. Looking at dps in 5km only...the blasters are the winners, what a shock! Then you cut the other graph off before it reaches 40+km, to hide the massive advantage of scorch. All these prove is that statistics can and always have been a tool that cater to the biased analyst. EVE Trivia EVE History
Ravenal The Fated E.Y	Posted - 2009.10.05 16:24:00 - [60] ... which brings us to the heart of the matter. Could you please for the love of all that is sane rename the MEDIUM lasers to their proper SIZE names. medium pulse laser => small pulse laser heavy pulse laser => medium pulse laser mega pulse laser => large pulse laser .



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: 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.