EVE Search - New Dev Blog: Need for MOAR Speed

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: Need for MOAR Speed

» 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 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 33 post(s)
Nareg Maxence Gallente	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:40:00 - [91] Originally by: Zendoren Originally by: CCP Oveur Only a handful of people saw it internally before it was published, that was kind of my point so nobody could say "hey!". And no, people generally don't answer in my place. I speak for myself and elaborate on my own words. Also, it's not nice to assume I'm telling you lies Who Are you? What do you do? Why are you here? Update your Bio Info please! Kids these days..
Mynxee	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:40:00 - [92] Originally by: CCP Explorer We switched to scrum at the beginning of Apocrypha. It worked well to coordinate a large number of people to make a large number of features. Unfortunately it resulted in a large number of defect reports. I wonder how much of that was due to "culture shock" at a new way of doing things...that usually always poses communications and process challenges because it has its own learning curve. After gaining experience and expertise in the SCRUM methodology, one would assume that teams could undertake a similarly large expansion with relatively far fewer defects. But...I'm just guessing, as I have no direct experience in this myself. Life In Low Sec

CCP Oveur	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:41:00 - [93] Originally by: Malcanis It may have been buggy for you, but it was great for us, because it fixed one of our biggest problems: lag (Actually it fixed several game structure problems). Polish means something rather different to you than it does to us. Polish to us means gameplay that works. Apocrypha delivered this. As far as we the players are concerned Apocrypha scores pretty highly on what we think of as "polish". I understand that to you guys as coders it might have looked like a plate of spaghetti with live eel sauce, but to us it was great not because of W-space or T3, but because a really really important part of the game started working a whole lot better. W-space and T3 were both great, but NFS was what really made it good. In short, I can definitely understand why you said what you did, but I think you're radically misinterpreting the data. And I can point to thousands of posts on your forums that support my interpretation and contradict yours. Again, this isn't my opinion. The context was about Apocrypha versus other expansions and how well they sold. I was stating a fact about pure numbers. Everybody here loved Apocrypha, including me - and that's my opinion. Quantum Rise was actually the very focused Need for Speed expansion and had StacklessIO, not Apocrypha. The performance work in Apocrypha was a lot of work being done post-Quantum Rise. Apocrypha basically only had feature teams. So sure, we have different nomenclature and that's always a great way to misunderstand each other. Polish for me is a team working on a feature and then iterating on it and incorporating feedback based on testing. It has nothing to do with bugs, because we call that bugfixing. The Apocrypha feature teams had no teams for polish because we were neck deep in bugfixing and I'm pretty sure any of our game designers will come here and tell you that they had no time for polish. But again, I and everybody else, love Apocrypha. We're still not going to cram this many features into an expansion because we want more time for polish and iteration. That's why I disagreed with the CSM that we weren't striving for Excellence. We still are, we don't believe we're there yet - in fact I think we'll never believe we'll get there because if we do, I'm sure we'll find ways to do even better. That's how CCP was born. We didn't give up despite running out of money, despite our launch being bug- and lagfest of epic proportions. We kept on developing, making it better, more expansions. And we believe this is why we're here today. Because we stick to our game, we keep on developing it and we care about it. It's why the others died and we're still here after 7 years and still growing. I'm fine with us disagreeing whether we have achieved it or not, only way for us to show it is by delivering a better experience. Talk is cheap. But I most certainly will not agree with anyone that we don't try. We. Will. Never. Leave. EVE. Honestly. Someone saying to me that we will is the same as saying I'd leave my kids. Executive Producer EVE Online

Indeterminacy THORN Syndicate Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:41:00 - [94] Edited by: Indeterminacy on 13/08/2010 19:41:34 Originally by: Malcanis bunch of stuff tl;dr perception is reality. Glad to have some meaningful communication on this issue. If a bit late in coming.
Viper ShizzIe Habitual Euthanasia Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:43:00 - [95] Have you figured out why the game worked a year ago and stopped working about 8 months ago?
SIEGE RED	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:43:00 - [96] Originally by: MARS VICTOR Originally by: CCP Explorer Originally by: MARS VICTOR Was it not after Apocrypha that you switched to Agile? I do wonder how a value set like that of apocrypha would be handled through Scrum. It's clear Apocrypha created a technical debt, but how would that be within the use of scrum. We switched to scrum at the beginning of Apocrypha. It worked well to coordinate a large number of people to make a large number of features. Unfortunately it resulted in a large number of defect reports. So, you did something that massive effectively while switching systems and methods. Speaking from experience it does not strike me as a surprise then that this created technical debt. Have you factored this in as one of the origins of either human resource or systems pattern factors leading to technical debt? Traditionally in our (software) industry) it is a primary cause in such circumstances of technical debt after all. That's why an inroduction of transition to Scrum is always accompanied by engaging in smaller projects. That's a pretty good question actually.
Dakisha H A V O C Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:46:00 - [97] Originally by: CCP Oveur excuses for 18 month quote sitting out there for so long Ofc, the big ass 60+ page thread that repeatedly mentioned it on most every page - that same thread that all the devs were supposedly reading, that Helmar posted in - and not one of you thought to 'clarify' that little gem? Instead you've now come out with a 'reinterpretation' of the same quote. That's fine if that's a face saving backpedal and you're going to work on the stuffs we want to see over the next 18 months - but somehow I suspect it's still all going to be WIS and Dust. Oh; and thanks for the devblog that told us that you're going to give some more devblogs. I still can't quite believe that this is all a 60+ page FFFUUUUUUUU CCP thread managed to produce..
Shaalira D'arc	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:47:00 - [98] Nice update. Looking forward to the blog blob. Speaking of polish and iterations, any hints as to Winter expansion plans?
Breaker77 Gallente Reclamation Industries	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:47:00 - [99] Originally by: Viper **zIe Have you figured out why the game worked a year ago and stopped working about 8 months ago? It was answered in the first 3 pages of this thread. Read it.

CCP Oveur	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:49:00 - [100] Originally by: SIEGE RED Originally by: MARS VICTOR Originally by: CCP Explorer Originally by: MARS VICTOR Was it not after Apocrypha that you switched to Agile? I do wonder how a value set like that of apocrypha would be handled through Scrum. It's clear Apocrypha created a technical debt, but how would that be within the use of scrum. We switched to scrum at the beginning of Apocrypha. It worked well to coordinate a large number of people to make a large number of features. Unfortunately it resulted in a large number of defect reports. So, you did something that massive effectively while switching systems and methods. Speaking from experience it does not strike me as a surprise then that this created technical debt. Have you factored this in as one of the origins of either human resource or systems pattern factors leading to technical debt? Traditionally in our (software) industry) it is a primary cause in such circumstances of technical debt after all. That's why an inroduction of transition to Scrum is always accompanied by engaging in smaller projects. That's a pretty good question actually. Yes we did. Both were large contributing factors. Executive Producer EVE Online


Viper ShizzIe Habitual Euthanasia Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:53:00 - [101] Originally by: Breaker77 Originally by: Viper **zIe Have you figured out why the game worked a year ago and stopped working about 8 months ago? It was answered in the first 3 pages of this thread. Read it. All I heard were excuses about why they wouldn't be devoting any time to fixing the numerous problems until Winter 2011
Quesa D00M. Northern Coalition.	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:54:00 - [102] Edited by: Quesa on 13/08/2010 19:55:39 To say that Apoc code is what's causing the server performance dump may be true. However, to state that Dominion code had nothing to do with it is disingenuous because it was a very abrupt change when Dominion was released. I also appreciate that CCP dev's are starting to post more on these types of threads. The biggest hindrance to your stature is the inability to communicate to the player-base effectively, basically leaving everyone in the dark about problems for fear of saying something that some ass-hat will hold you to 5 years down the line. Rational people appreciate honesty over sticking to timelines, development plans or cycles. I had planned on using them to fix fleet lag but was talked out of it. -CCP Zulu
Breaker77 Gallente Reclamation Industries	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:54:00 - [103] Originally by: Viper **zIe Originally by: Breaker77 Originally by: Viper **zIe Have you figured out why the game worked a year ago and stopped working about 8 months ago? It was answered in the first 3 pages of this thread. Read it. All I heard were excuses about why they wouldn't be devoting any time to fixing the numerous problems until Winter 2011 Then the answer to your question would be no

CCP Oveur	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:55:00 - [104] Originally by: Dakisha Originally by: CCP Oveur excuses for 18 month quote sitting out there for so long Ofc, the big ass 60+ page thread that repeatedly mentioned it on most every page - that same thread that all the devs were supposedly reading, that Helmar posted in - and not one of you thought to 'clarify' that little gem? Instead you've now come out with a 'reinterpretation' of the same quote. That's fine if that's a face saving backpedal and you're going to work on the stuffs we want to see over the next 18 months - but somehow I suspect it's still all going to be WIS and Dust. Oh; and thanks for the devblog that told us that you're going to give some more devblogs. I still can't quite believe that this is all a 60+ page FFFUUUUUUUU CCP thread managed to produce.. How do you suggest these persons comment on what I said in a meeting and clarify that, which they weren't in or didn't hear? You might also want to read my other comments on the blogs. I just stated that the only way to fix lag is by fixing it. I'm not trying any jedi mind tricks or smoke and mirrors. The lag will go, you will notice it and that's when we've proved that we put a lot of effort into it. Well, cya all - I'm very late for dinner now. Executive Producer EVE Online

Ban Doga	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:56:00 - [105] Originally by: CCP Explorer Originally by: CCP Oveur Originally by: mrpapageorgio Originally by: CCP Zulu We call this the long battle on lag because there's not a single issue that creates lag or removes it. Wrong, Dominion. That's actually a wrong assumption. I'd elaborate but I can't use numbers. It makes me look worse. To back up CCP Oveur here with the numbers: The specific issues that cropped up in Dominion, memory leaks and DB session starvation, were fixed by February this year. The memory leaks had been fixed in December 2009. The DB session starvation was tracked down in late January, confirmed in a mass-test on Singularity on 27 January and the fix was deployed to TQ on 9 February ("TRANQUILITY HOTFIX v.6.21.127381_4"). It was not the silver bullet to end all lag but it was a big fix for a regression we could trace back to Dominion and this hotfix had a clearly measurable positive impact on fleet fight lag. CCP Atlas wrote a dev blog about those issues on 4 Feb. In that dev blog he discussed one of the remaining issues, the "blackscreening client". We started work on that issue and deployed changes to TQ this summer to improve and mitigate it (dev blog is being planned). We haven't fixed the issue but we have improved it and are still working on it. More fixes were deployed to TQ yesterday (12 August, "TRANQUILITY HOTFIX v.6.30.167296_10"; another dev blog is being planned to detail the results) and still more are in various stages of code review and testing (yes, you guessed it, even more dev blogs are being planned). All of these fixes involve performance enhancements to old code, not Dominion code. Yet all this didn't fix "the lag". So maybe those bugs aren't the "big ones" that cause it. You appear so desperately to attribute "the lag" to things before Dominion and try to back that up with a lot of bug fixes to older code. But do you realise this also means those bug fixes did not fix the problem? Further more Apocrypha (the last expansion before Dominion) was perceived as the expansion with the biggest performance boost, so it's kinda hard to believe you when you say "lag started before well before Dominion". Originally by: CCP Oveur The metrics about sales and quality? The point there was pretty simple and the numbers behind it as well. Apocrypha which was taken as an example for a great expansion and sold very well, was the most buggiest expansion we have done and created the largest technical debt of any expansion before and we even cut a ton of features due to technical issues with them. There, poor quality sold boatloads. A mistake is as serious as the consequences it causes. The same is true about bugs: A thousand incredibly stupid bugs that cause reversible problems (iow. things that "heal" themselves, potentially even without the user ever knowing there was a problem) is nothing compared to one bug that causes total data loss. Even if that bug is a very small "one off" bug. So just going after the total number of bugs in an expansion is a bit shallow. Your flagship feature performed best under Apocrypha and now it performs as poorly as never before in the last year. How can you take that as an indicator that "poor quality sold boatloads.". It did not sell because of all the bugs you saw but because of the features that worked so well. There is a great difference between the internal quality of a software and the quality perceived by the users. Things like usefulness or ease-of-use are outside your code metrics. You appear to think that you don't need to look at the number of working features that remain in the release and only need to count the bugs and cancelled features to predict the success of an expansion. And as Explorer so eloquently explained a lot of the things that keep getting requested aren't even bugs, they are "design changes"...
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:56:00 - [106] Originally by: CCP Oveur We. Will. Never. Leave. EVE. Honestly. Someone saying to me that we will is the same as saying I'd leave my kids. Thank you for spending so much of your time replying to me. I do appreciate it. Obviously we have different perspectives on identical goal: to have the best EVE possible. I'll leave it with this: you have a really, really valuable resource in the CSM. Particularly this CSM. It's not a question of being "right" or "wrong", it's a question of different perspectives. That's the common theme that has run through this whole furore. You really need that alternative perspective, because - as you imply with your "heads down" phrase - you guys have kind of lost touch with us somewhere along the way. You really need that alternative perspective to get it back. I know that the CSM are going to say things you wont like hearing, and they're going to have an interpretation of the things you guys say that might not accord with your own, and it's going to be hard work, but please dont succumb to the temptation to sideline or ignore them. And most especially dont hold back on communicating with them because you're worried about the rest of us not liking what you say. That's only successful in avoiding bad feeling in the very short term. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
el caido School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:57:00 - [107] Cheers to Oveur for taking command of this thread. While I am still unsatisfied with the current state of the game, it is a relief to see someone of intelligence finally answering the questions. I look forward to the tech blogs ... and progress.
HenkieBoy Best Path Inc. Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2010.08.13 19:59:00 - [108] This whole lag stuff.. why was the sov change made in a way to get even more lag? I mean, we even have to blob more. Before the sov changes we shot posses, alot.. and with the new sov we need to shoot a couple of structures inside the same system within the same timeframe.
Arimathea Anthalas Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:00:00 - [109] Oveur, let me let you in on something you've probably already figured out. The more talking you do the happier people are. Whether it's esoterica like semaphores and locks and Stackless Python multiprocessor work or whether it's internal process talk, that kind of **** all helps the player base understand what's going on. While I think universally the improvements vs new features comment faces disapproval by the majority of the player base, and while fixes to long-standing issues (assault frigates, T3 blackops cynos vs work on walking in space and console stuff) are sorely needed probably moreso than discussion, discussion helps. So thanks. The best thing you can do to restore confidence from the bitter vet crowd is to start spitting out fixes and adjustments rather than letting them flounder in endless balance discussion and be more verbal (and even deep, not all of us need it spoon fed) to the players. One or two minor fixes to long standing issues would go a long way.
wr3cks Reliables Inc Majesta Empire	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:00:00 - [110] Originally by: Dakisha Originally by: CCP Oveur excuses for 18 month quote sitting out there for so long Ofc, the big ass 60+ page thread that repeatedly mentioned it on most every page - that same thread that all the devs were supposedly reading, that Helmar posted in - and not one of you thought to 'clarify' that little gem? Instead you've now come out with a 'reinterpretation' of the same quote. That's fine if that's a face saving backpedal and you're going to work on the stuffs we want to see over the next 18 months - but somehow I suspect it's still all going to be WIS and Dust. Oh; and thanks for the devblog that told us that you're going to give some more devblogs. I still can't quite believe that this is all a 60+ page FFFUUUUUUUU CCP thread managed to produce.. Seconded. Also, wasn't this the focus of a 1.5 hour meeting? CSM: We think a lot of content and features are released with low quality and bugs. Nathan: We find new features sell better than polished content. <90 minutes of back and forth> <a month later> Nathan: Er, what I meant was, we're going to continue making buggy content just like apocrypha. You see, we'll release big, new features that worked just fine on scheduled release without breaking any important game functionality (like working 300v300 fleet fights). But, boy, if you could look at our clipboard, it sure had a lot of bugs. Funny that this was discussed face to face for 90+ minutes, and then in god knows how many 50+ page threads for a month, and this comes out only now. OOOOooooh what I meant was the exact opposite!

SIEGE RED	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:03:00 - [111] Edited by: SIEGE RED on 13/08/2010 20:04:54 Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: CCP Oveur We. Will. Never. Leave. EVE. Honestly. Someone saying to me that we will is the same as saying I'd leave my kids. Thank you for spending so much of your time replying to me. I do appreciate it. Obviously we have different perspectives on identical goal: to have the best EVE possible. I'll leave it with this: you have a really, really valuable resource in the CSM. Particularly this CSM. It's not a question of being "right" or "wrong", it's a question of different perspectives. That's the common theme that has run through this whole furore. You really need that alternative perspective, because - as you imply with your "heads down" phrase - you guys have kind of lost touch with us somewhere along the way. You really need that alternative perspective to get it back. I know that the CSM are going to say things you wont like hearing, and they're going to have an interpretation of the things you guys say that might not accord with your own, and it's going to be hard work, but please dont succumb to the temptation to sideline or ignore them. And most especially dont hold back on communicating with them because you're worried about the rest of us not liking what you say. That's only successful in avoiding bad feeling in the very short term. Now those two posts, make a great post (full posts, not just the quotes). together. And yeah, sure we still have to see results, but this is excellent. Malcanis is right on the CSM thing as well, I've always been "oh it's for the emo kids to feel popular" where it comes to the CSM, but this CSM has changed that. Particularly Mynxee and Trebor. CCP would do good in placing solid value on the process, and on the people.
Bomberlocks Minmatar CTRL-Q	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:12:00 - [112] Nice blog, Zulu. I think you should have done this a month ago, to be honest, but at least this way, you're showing us that you're at least doing something.
Washukanni	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:12:00 - [113] So does this mean you might look at Faction Warfare sometime in the next five years? How about the COSMOS refresh that was promised all those years ago..(you should have some personal insights into this area from 'in game' play)
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:18:00 - [114] Originally by: CCP Oveur I'm Nathan Richardsson. Executive Producer for CCP. I'm responsible for all our games. I like spandex to an unhealthy degree. Waaa....what?? And..and the .... beer??? No beer mentioned? That can't be the real Oveur!!! Hey, hehe, awesome seeing you guys back on track again. Hope you had a good summer vaction. Yay! Those 18 months, haha, that was funny. People can be so ... yuck, stupid? Suuuure... no new stuff for Eve for 18 months, all development cancelled, yadayada, lolz. Looking forward to the blogs. <3 CCP
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:22:00 - [115] Originally by: Bomberlocks Nice blog, Zulu. I think you should have done this a month ago, to be honest, but at least this way, you're showing us that you're at least thinking about doing something. FYP Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Ebisu Kami	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:28:00 - [116] Edited by: Ebisu Kami on 13/08/2010 20:34:51 Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: CCP Oveur We. Will. Never. Leave. EVE. Honestly. Someone saying to me that we will is the same as saying I'd leave my kids. Thank you for spending so much of your time replying to me. I do appreciate it. Obviously we have different perspectives on identical goal: to have the best EVE possible. I'll leave it with this: you have a really, really valuable resource in the CSM. Particularly this CSM. It's not a question of being "right" or "wrong", it's a question of different perspectives. That's the common theme that has run through this whole furore. You really need that alternative perspective, because - as you imply with your "heads down" phrase - you guys have kind of lost touch with us somewhere along the way. You really need that alternative perspective to get it back. I know that the CSM are going to say things you wont like hearing, and they're going to have an interpretation of the things you guys say that might not accord with your own, and it's going to be hard work, but please dont succumb to the temptation to sideline or ignore them. And most especially dont hold back on communicating with them because you're worried about the rest of us not liking what you say. That's only successful in avoiding bad feeling in the very short term. Here, Oveur, I hope you read Malcanis' posts well, because they summarize some of the problems we're currently facing when trying to get our view to you. For example our perception of quality doesn't include your code and it's execution or implementation, because it's simply not existing from our player-pov. When we're talking about quality, we talk about game-play, lag-freeness, low latency and well working features, not technical execution of zeroes and ones. Of course we know, that is part of your view, but when communicating with us, please try to think of where our view comes from, because we simply lack access to things, which are trivial to you.
Isten Baba	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:28:00 - [117] Edited by: Isten Baba on 13/08/2010 20:29:04 Originally by: CCP Oveur I'm Nathan Richardsson. Executive Producer for CCP. I'm responsible for all our games. I like spandex to an unhealthy degree. Cool! A small request: Would it be possible in any way to clarify how much of EVE subscriber money (resources) goes to Dust (why? what are you thinking?!?) and vampires? You are obviously enitled to do with subscriber money as you please, but I'm really concerned as an EVE customer. I will stay with EVE regardless of flaws, mistakes, lag, bad expansions (PI), features that don't interest me (Incarna), and slow development. It is still a wonderful game that I enjoy. However, if these problems are the result of less CCP commitment to EVE and greater resource dedication to other games (FPS and vampires? seriously?), I'm not sure I want to hang around. I want my money to go to the game I play, and not to making CCP yet another gaming behemoth. So, please put my worried little mind at ease (if you can)!

CCP Explorer	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:31:00 - [118] Originally by: Quesa To say that Apoc code is what's causing the server performance dump may be true. However, to state that Dominion code had nothing to do with it is disingenuous because it was a very abrupt change when Dominion was released. I answered this earlier in this thread. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson Software Director EVE Online, CCP Games

okst666	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:33:00 - [119] Originally by: Isten Baba Edited by: Isten Baba on 13/08/2010 20:29:04 Originally by: CCP Oveur I'm Nathan Richardsson. Executive Producer for CCP. I'm responsible for all our games. I like spandex to an unhealthy degree. Cool! A small request: Would it be possible in any way to clarify how much of EVE subscriber money (resources) goes to Dust (why? what are you thinking?!?) and vampires? You are obviously enitled to do with subscriber money as you please, but I'm really concerned as an EVE customer. I will stay with EVE regardless of flaws, mistakes, lag, bad expansions (PI), features that don't interest me (Incarna), and slow development. It is still a wonderful game that I enjoy. However, if these problems are the result of less CCP commitment to EVE and greater resource dedication to other games (FPS and vampires? seriously?), I'm not sure I want to hang around. I want my money to go to the game I play, and not to making CCP yet another gaming behemoth. So, please put my worried little mind at ease (if you can)!
SkinSin	Posted - 2010.08.13 20:37:00 - [120] Edited by: SkinSin on 13/08/2010 20:37:50 That's nice. A reply at last. And although lag is extremely important, there are other things than lag! Are you going to also make an attempt to finish the things that currently aren't, or the things that are currently broken (FW, COSMOS, ludicrous sov mechanics, invention, the bounty system, null sec, etc) or are you just going to stick to actually trying to finish PI and making minor tweaks to things?! Seriously, the amount of unfinished content in Eve is embarrassing. It's like you work on it for one patch cycle and then abandon it for 3 years, rather than finishing it!



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