EVE Search - Sticky:Dev blog: Where we stand

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Sticky:Dev blog: Where we stand

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)

CCP Phantom C C P C C P Alliance 5371	Posted - 2015.03.03 15:07:45 - [1] - Quote With the Phoebe release in November 2014 we started "Phase One" of the sovereignty changes. Those changes included significant changes to the speed of long distance travel and power projection, as well as smaller changes to the hitpoints and resistances of Sovereignty structures. Now it is time to look back a bit and evaluate the effects of those changes. Read more about the effects and results of those changes and check the interesting stats presented in CCP Fozzie's blog Where we stand. CCP Phantom - Senior Community Representative - Volunteer Manager

Gilbaron Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda 1683	Posted - 2015.03.03 15:10:14 - [2] - Quote The link to the second Devblog isn't working. And my battery is at 15%. fml Build your empire ! Rent Space in Feythabolis and Omist Contact me for details :)
GeeShizzle MacCloud 521	Posted - 2015.03.03 15:15:57 - [3] - Quote #reserved
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation The Kadeshi 1271	Posted - 2015.03.03 15:23:25 - [4] - Quote Why do you release these graphs all the time without the vertical axis label? I mean, there is a blue line but it tells me next to nothing in terms of numbers, which makes this graph about as objectively informative as reading tea leaves. That graph can be 1k, 10k or just 100 people. Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
Aebe Amraen Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 119	Posted - 2015.03.03 15:30:23 - [5] - Quote I noticed a distinct lack of statistics about black ops battleship usage, which was a large area of concern for both the CSM (according to the summer summit minutes) and the player base as a whole when the changes were announced. Certainly in the 38.1% of nullsec PvP that HERO accounts for, black ops usage both for bridging and combat has dropped dramatically due to jump fatigue. What about the rest of the game? Are you happy with the changes in black ops activity?
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1027	Posted - 2015.03.03 15:59:21 - [6] - Quote I read the whole thing
Commander Insignia Di-Tron Heavy Industries Fatal Ascension 22	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:23:34 - [7] - Quote Still doesn't stop be from wanting to be reimbursed sp across 12 alts that will now never use their caps again
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. 3173	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:32:28 - [8] - Quote One issue with a graph showing the number of subs in null increasing is I do not know if that is from a general move to null, or a general increase in subs across the entire game. Is the percentage of players operating in Null increasing? The same issue exists for the graphs of PvP activity. Is it null improving, or just more activity in general? Know a Frozen fan? Check this out Frozen fanfiction
TheSmokingHertog TALIBAN EXPRESS 293	Posted - 2015.03.03 17:12:47 - [9] - Quote Nice read, thx.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5908	Posted - 2015.03.03 17:47:27 - [10] - Quote Rivr Luzade wrote: Why do you release these graphs all the time without the vertical axis label? I mean, there is a blue line but it tells me next to nothing in terms of numbers, which makes this graph about as objectively informative as reading tea leaves. That graph can be 1k, 10k or just 100 people. 1) They explained in the blog why they didn't use numbers. 2) They said the Y-axis was linear, so you can extrapolate percentages based on distance from 0. 3) If you couldn't figure out #2 or read to find #1, does it mean you're trolling or just not that into graph-****? I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
Sodamn In-sane Phorever People 3	Posted - 2015.03.03 18:01:36 - [11] - Quote lol ofc the numbers went high people logged in to suicide their caps ,loot at numbers now they heading DOWN well that being said im greased up ready for another penetration from CCP fossil what do you mean lock caps? my caps-lock is on,
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1436	Posted - 2015.03.03 18:40:24 - [12] - Quote More nullbear tears please. The Tears Must Flow
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 10014	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:39:49 - [13] - Quote Reading that dev blog is proof that some people are incredibly optimistic no matter what lol. No, the jockeying for position that resulted from phoebe isn't proof of success, like wise I'll be their are increases in low sec and wormhole activity, but that's because null coalitions are taking low sec moons they might not have bothered with otherwise and because null coalitions have to rely on wormholes for travel and content now. Those coalitions have concentrated in 'near null' while still possessing deep null. With the exception of the Immensea/south area, it's business as usual in null, it's a renters paradise. Phase to has to address the VALUE of null, not just how it's won or lost.
Soldarius Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent 1159	Posted - 2015.03.03 20:07:19 - [14] - Quote Sov changes are still anemically low, and most of those are not from pvp, but arranged sov transfers. Is it better than right before Phoebe? Yes. But not by much. Sov is off life support. But it is still in the Serious Condition Ward pending further improvement. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Saidin Thor The Odin Conspiracy 43	Posted - 2015.03.03 20:12:26 - [15] - Quote I'd be very interested to see a little bit more information on the "characters in null sec" statistic. Not the numbers themselves, mind you, but the same statistic in relation to other numbers. Specifically, I think it would be worth looking at four additional graphs: 1. Active Null Characters Normalized by Total Active Characters 2. Active Null Characters Normalized by Active Lowsec Characters 3. Active Null Characters Normalized by Active Highsec Characters 4. Active Null Characters Normalized by Active Wormhole Characters It's really, really easy to find SOME sort of statistic to support literally any viewpoint. What we have right now is a single snapshot taken out of context and being used to give positive support to changes. A much more credible way to look at the information you've presented is in the reference to the other major groups of space. Knowing that the number of players went up is one thing, but knowing that both the number of players went up AND knowing that this change is actively moving players towards null sec and away from other types of space (which should be the goal here) is quite another thing entirely. Of course, the axes can be obfuscated the exact same way as the original graph. The dates and trends are really the only important things.
Scatim Helicon GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 3114	Posted - 2015.03.03 20:27:23 - [16] - Quote It's cute that you tried to put a brave face on it but the real story here is that Phoebe's much vaunted changes completely failed to have any lasting effect beyond a wave of fully consensual sov transfers between the usual Great Powers. Most of those graphs show the brief spike of activity one would expect in the wake of any patch before retreating to the status quo, the 'Nullsec population' graph being particularly telling in that the decline in activity seems to have been only halted by the trailer release. Post on the Eve-o forums with a Goonswarm Federation character that drinking bleach is bad for you, and 20 forum warriors will hospitalise themselves trying to prove you wrong.
Krell Kroenen The Devil's Shadow 241	Posted - 2015.03.03 20:38:27 - [17] - Quote Given the decline of the average player count I can't help but wonder where the slight uptick of Null population came from? Could you show us a graph of Highsec and Lowsec populations for the same time periods?
flapie 2 Planetary Traders Union 15	Posted - 2015.03.03 22:15:05 - [18] - Quote Hmm no data on what % of the player base actually has / used (or not used for that matter) or had a Capital before and after the changes, i wonder how that looks next to the rest of the graphs. Id say that type of data would be at least as important as how often they are used in actual PvP across the Universe. Also i would have like to see more split data on Capitals, not just across the Universe but also low and null separate to see witch of the 2 has been most affect by said changes, and thus if the intention behind the changes has really worked out or just boosted a single area. Nice read though, interesting results, maybe ill tackle the SOV changes part 2 tomorrow it was quite the wall text when i quickly scrolled over it.
Alexis Nightwish 112	Posted - 2015.03.03 22:31:04 - [19] - Quote Can someone smarter than me explain how they would meta the **** out of the graphs if they had a Y-axis? CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
Cr Turist Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 40	Posted - 2015.03.03 23:38:00 - [20] - Quote hummm
Vladimir Markovich BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective 0	Posted - 2015.03.04 00:12:22 - [21] - Quote Will there be any restrictions on the use of the entosis module in conjunction with bastion/siege modules?
Gregor Parud Ordo Ardish 1242	Posted - 2015.03.04 00:43:45 - [22] - Quote It's funny how large coalitions remain large after those jump fatigue changes and then go "see, there's nothing to shoot". No **** Sherlock, how about actually resetting some neighbours.
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Shadow of xXDEATHXx 137	Posted - 2015.03.04 01:23:17 - [23] - Quote Id like to see data on just how many people were killed by 'skynet' and how many were just killed by fighters next to the carrier vs the all pvp numbers
Mr Omniblivion GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 414	Posted - 2015.03.04 03:05:28 - [24] - Quote Whoever is running and/or evaluating your data is not very good at it. You're looking at correlations and calling them causation. You're attributing things like increased activity in null to Phoebe, when in fact it is due to other factors such as the "this is eve" video and recruitment in nullsec in general. KarmaFleet alone has picked up several hundred players (hundreds more of characters) that were recruited from high sec and/or directly into null from Reddit. This data does not show any causation based on Phoebe, and without realizing that, you're going to severely ruin the majority of nullsec.
Ser Berus GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 20	Posted - 2015.03.04 03:11:05 - [25] - Quote Gregor Parud wrote: It's funny how large coalitions remain large after those jump fatigue changes and then go "see, there's nothing to shoot". No **** Sherlock, how about actually resetting some neighbours. Perhaps we would if there was any reason to beyond "it makes some hisec residents unhappy". Wait, that's actually a reason not to.
ergherhdfgh Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 398	Posted - 2015.03.04 05:11:54 - [26] - Quote Granted that I am not a PvPer but I do mostly live in null and I don't think that having system flipping as a goal is really a good goal for increased PvP. I think the focus should be more on giving people reasons to fight over the space that they occupy rather than constantly forcing people to move around. I in the past have mentioned working use of the space into profitability of the space and also increasing the reasons to go NRDS as having a lot of neuts flying around can increase small gang activity. I have posted some of my ideas on this before and won't duplicate them here but if one of the devs want more info drop me a mail and I'll expand on this. I think cloaky camping is a huge problem that give way too much power to what is mostly afk game play. The amount of affect that an afk cloaky camper has compared to his actual time engaged with that client is so off balance that I think it is a far far greater problem than the off grid fighter assist that you are currently nerfing.
Aiyshimin Fistful of Finns Triumvirate. 428	Posted - 2015.03.04 07:18:18 - [27] - Quote Mr Omniblivion wrote: Whoever is running and/or evaluating your data is not very good at it. You're looking at correlations and calling them causation. You're attributing things like increased activity in null to Phoebe, when in fact it is due to other factors such as the "this is eve" video and recruitment in nullsec in general. KarmaFleet alone has picked up several hundred players (hundreds more of characters) that were recruited from high sec and/or directly into null from Reddit. This data does not show any causation based on Phoebe, and without realizing that, you're going to severely ruin the majority of nullsec. Then again, nobody in their right minds would have joined nullsec before Phoebe changes.
WNxWolfy Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda 8	Posted - 2015.03.04 09:18:04 - [28] - Quote In this devblog: Graphs are wildly misinterpreted, statistics are given the finger.
Gregor Parud Ordo Ardish 1249	Posted - 2015.03.04 09:51:47 - [29] - Quote Ser Berus wrote: Gregor Parud wrote: It's funny how large coalitions remain large after those jump fatigue changes and then go "see, there's nothing to shoot". No **** Sherlock, how about actually resetting some neighbours. Perhaps we would if there was any reason to beyond "it makes some hisec residents unhappy". Wait, that's actually a reason not to. How do high sec residents have anything to do with "stop being a ***** and start resetting some blues, instead of whining like a girl"?
Freelancer117 So you want to be a Hero 268	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:25:08 - [30] - Quote Thanks for the graphs and information CCP, however there is something bugging me from this devblog. 1. You say that there is a +23.6% increase in manufacturing jobs per day in Nullsec since Phoebe, thats nice But only a +0.7% increase in mining volume per day in Nullsec since Phoebe. Even with the +5% increase in NPC kills per day in Nullsec since Phoebe and presumed reprocessing of loot into manufacturing materials, the numbers mined from nullsec to support these building jobs come up way to short. I can only conclude that nullsec is still on the Jita life support, and it has been mentioned in the [Phoebe] Long Distance Travel Changes - updates! thread that nullsec needs this lifeline because the major coalitions are to scared to truly life in nullsec on their own without outside help. The [Kronos] Freighters and Jump Freighters Rebalance [Updated] was a great start at looking how hisec and nullsec interaction of materials could be improved, but you kinda dropped the ball by caving into nullsec Lords demand and allowing Jump Freighters and Rorquals to be special-cased, the conditions for any nullsec stagnation is not taken away this way. 2. Capital Ship Activity, you mentioned in the original Phase One Dev Blog, that you hoped the reduced chance of being hotdropped would provide more opportunities for people to feel comfortable using small numbers of capital ships in PVP. Your conclusion so far is that the overall score for Capital Ship Activity: A wash. Continued work on engaging and balanced roles for Capital Ships will be needed in the future, especially as some of their current roles in structure shooting are de-emphasized in Phase Two. Please also keep in mind that you also have Covert Ops Black Ships to play around with for balancing 3. Sovereignty Conquests, now this is where I have the most trouble with. The whole article about this reads like CCP wants to play in the sandbox and the company decides how nullsec social clubs are allowed to play with the sand. Quote: The results of Phase One on this metric have been noticeable and positive, however we would have been happier with a higher status quo over the past three months. If Phase Two is a success, we would ideally like to see a significantly higher status quo, less reliant on bursts of activity from major wars. There is hubris in this, and I would like to call Bullshit on this before we have another "customer disgruntlement" incident. Regards, a Freelancer The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans. http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg GÇÖChilde Roland to the Dark Tower came.GÇÖ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY3oMRLfArU
Sentinel Eeex Thunderwaffe Goonswarm Federation 138	Posted - 2015.03.04 14:33:42 - [31] - Quote You should make some more misleading graphs and statistics to justify ******** changes you've introduced with Phoebe.
Boomstick SMD GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2015.03.04 16:15:40 - [32] - Quote Mr Omniblivion wrote: Whoever is running and/or evaluating your data is not very good at it. You're looking at correlations and calling them causation. You're attributing things like increased activity in null to Phoebe, when in fact it is due to other factors such as the "this is eve" video and recruitment in nullsec in general. KarmaFleet alone has picked up several hundred players (hundreds more of characters) that were recruited from high sec and/or directly into null from Reddit. This data does not show any causation based on Phoebe, and without realizing that, you're going to severely ruin the majority of nullsec. This is the same company that seems to think BCs are in a "good place" because their overall generalized stats show a lot of BC dps (almost 100% soley from highsec suicide ganking in taloses), and that ishtars arn't imbalanced because people that are AFK die in them.
Falin Whalen GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 759	Posted - 2015.03.04 16:27:43 - [33] - Quote Nice shooting Tex. "it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves." The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
Bob Niac Joint Espionage and Defence Industries Preatoriani 54	Posted - 2015.03.04 16:41:20 - [34] - Quote Fozzie: Would you be able to add engagements to to those stats? Kills are all well and good, but battles are better, yeah? ie: How many large engagements were there on a week to week trend? Actually something easier to track: How many kills were involved in where the deceased was less than a full squad? A wing? More than 2 wings? How about metrics for the inverse as well? I am interested in seeing where the metrics are [u]I <3 Logistics:[/u] Pilot of all -áT2 logi and my shiny Archon [deceased.] Also a Chimera which may or may not be horrid. I don't make games, I play them. I get that ppl are passionate about change. I post here to plant seeds. You see your idea as is? Holy **** you win! So let's post, and see what the DEVs and our peers use.
Mr Omniblivion GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 425	Posted - 2015.03.04 19:09:53 - [35] - Quote I asked Fozzie at Eve Vegas about why null ores are in such a horrible place at the moment, and mentioned that Arkonor is on par with Omber as the least valuable ore in the game. His response? "We have a report that is run weekly that shows us the value". If it's on the same level of these reports, no wonder null ore anomalies haven't been fixed yet
Styphon the Black Forced Euthanasia Soviet-Union 9	Posted - 2015.03.04 19:32:31 - [36] - Quote If they really wanted to increase the amount of PVP happening in Nullsec and to give the "little guy" a shot all that needs to happen is create some more NPC controlled systems in Null. Place them in the middle of large SOV areas. These "islands" of systems would give smaller corps and alliances a foothold in Null and a staging point to launch into SOV space. Obviously if these systems aren't created with enough entry and exit points into SOV space the larger controlling alliance could just camp the point of entry and close off the up start alliances access. Same problem if not enough space stations are available in those areas. You can already see this in pirate controlled regions that more PVP happens in and around that space. Regardless of this suggest it will not increase capital kills. No body is going to risk a capital if they think they are going to lose it. Too much of an investment. So large capital battles will continue to happen only between large alliance fleets.
Mr Omniblivion GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 427	Posted - 2015.03.04 19:42:01 - [37] - Quote I'm curious about what your reports told you about walking in stations
Bowbndr Twisted Metal Inc. Northern Associates. 7	Posted - 2015.03.05 01:37:49 - [38] - Quote After reading through the dev blog and responses to it, as well as many other articles on these GÇ£Changes for GoodGÇ¥ CCP is forcing on everyone. I have said this over many of the past patches and everyone just says that the GÇ£care bears are crying againGÇ¥ Well letGÇÖs kill pap in this game for a little bit and see if you feel the same way. Every patch for the last 1.5 to 2 years has all been aimed at killing off Industry in eve. CCP says that a player can do anything in eve they wish, what they havent had the courage to say is that they are going to Kill industry in the game so you have to buy all your in game goods from them. CCP claims that they are fair about their changes, and yet what was fair about making it so that hostiles no longer have to scan down grav sites? And when that was overcome with the use of drag bubbles m they make interceptors immune so they can still catch industrialists out in their mining barges and exhumers. And all along they see no problem with a person flying or logging in a cloaky ship and closing down an entire system while they may or most likely are not even at the keyboard. If I disrupt anotherGÇÖs game play I get treats from CCP about banning my accounts, and yet they interfere with mine and CCP response is GÇ£oh thatGÇÖs a valid game tacticGÇ¥ CCP needs to learn and understand what the words fair and balance means before they kill their game completely.
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1448	Posted - 2015.03.05 23:15:17 - [39] - Quote Phoebe changes were amayzing. Thank you. The Tears Must Flow
Mr Omniblivion GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 458	Posted - 2015.03.06 02:06:38 - [40] - Quote Vaju Enki wrote: Phoebe changes were amayzing. Thank you. CCP wrote: http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66972/1/RegionalPVP.jpg Deklein: -20% I would have to agree
Sir Meephunter Brave Operations - Lollipop Division Brave Collective 0	Posted - 2015.03.06 08:14:44 - [41] - Quote RIP EVE after this. Cant wait until GOONS comes in and take all of NULL. But, we all think that this is what CCP wants Why fix what is not broken????? You can change, 1) How many ships use a cyno 2) Increase Jump Fatigue 3) Make Dreads reverent
Kinis Deren StarHunt Mordus Angels 446	Posted - 2015.03.07 14:58:02 - [42] - Quote Thank you CCP Fozzie for a very interesting dev blog. The health of the game (not just null sec) is something I take an active interest in. Some points worth bringing up (please see WTZ forum post linked above for graph explanations and data sources): - Null sec population does indeed appear to have increased (even before Pheobe, probably as a consequence of post Rubicon changes) but seems to have peaked. Notice the apparent inverse relationship between the hi sec and null sec populations in this Graph 1 which seems to indicate that there's a degree of null sec players choosing character movement between the two sectors of space depending upon perceived need or risk. - Population spikes are seen after a successful expansion/release implementation or oustanding marketing campaigns (This is EVE, in particular) as can be seen in this Graph 2. In particular, notice the very spiked hi sec kill data, possibly correlating with an influx of trial accounts or newbros. Furthermore, EVE participation is very seasonal (as can be seen in Graph 1 linked above). Generally speaking, we see a steady decline in player activity as the year progresses, only reversing the trend late in Q4. We therefore have to be very careful in judging how good, or bad, a change is to EVE by focusing on just the data without any seasonal effect adjustments. In many respects Pheobe was good for EVE especially as there didn't seem to be any signs of a "winter is coming" war on the horizon that might encourage greater player participation. - This next Graph 3 attempts to normalise the monthly kill data using monthly average PCU (thank you to Chribba for providing the PCU data) and adjustment for population distribution too. You can indeed see a bump in PVP activity in null sec but low sec saw a much higher increase for the same Pheobe effect period. Mind you, this graph also highlights how badly null sec PVP activity has lagged behind low sec since approximately mid 2012. - Unfortunately, the sov conquest data is rather misleading since it is well known that a lot of the data points represent some form of intra or inter-coalition tranfer activity. The big spike in sov conquests after Pheobe was largely down to a certain coalition selling the sov in the south and the new encumbents grinding down the structures without a fight. In my humble opinion, Pheobe was a good first dose of medicine for a rather sick & tired null sec. Scylla and the sov changes will have a greater impact as a consequence of Pheobe. Keep up the good work CCP, 2015 is shaping up to be a very interesting year for all EVE players.
Aebe Amraen Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 120	Posted - 2015.03.10 01:37:09 - [43] - Quote So is this thread just being ignored? I know the other dev blog resulted in a 180-page threadnaught, but it would be nice to at least get an acknowledgment, if not an answer, to the questions in this thread.
Alp Khan GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 296	Posted - 2015.03.10 23:40:18 - [44] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Then again, nobody in their right minds would have joined nullsec before Phoebe changes. I disagree. As a matter of fact, many individuals and groups have sought taking their place in sovereign null before Phoebe release. For instance, the history of EVE has seen at least six iterations of Triumvirate, the alliance you are a in, trying and ultimately failing to become a permanent part of the sovereign null.
Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe 6603	Posted - 2015.03.10 23:47:21 - [45] - Quote Alp Khan wrote: Aiyshimin wrote: Then again, nobody in their right minds would have joined nullsec before Phoebe changes. I disagree. As a matter of fact, many individuals and groups have sought taking their place in sovereign null before Phoebe release. For instance, the history of EVE has seen at least six iterations of Triumvirate, the alliance you are a in, trying and ultimately failing to become a permanent part of the sovereign null. Maybe they were just sovtrolling? Really didn't want that sov anyway? Aebe Amraen wrote: So is this thread just being ignored? I know the other dev blog resulted in a 180-page threadnaught, but it would be nice to at least get an acknowledgment, if not an answer, to the questions in this thread. Did the 180-page threadnaught get anything either? I don't think so. Perhaps if we shoot for 200 pages they will do something? Doubt it though. ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears. Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
Mr Omniblivion GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 495	Posted - 2015.03.11 01:55:31 - [46] - Quote Fozzie, can we please see the report that CCP is utilizing to judge how effective ore distribution and ore values are? I have a feeling that you're looking at (one unit of ore) value instead of (value per m3).
Lastrites BeenGiven Grumpy Pirates Association Sanctuary Pact 0	Posted - 2015.03.30 23:15:27 - [47] - Quote Can't wait to see the graphs after June.. Player base \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \| \| \| \| Houston... I think we have a problem. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Damn Jim... I'm a Doctor... not a Eve subscriber.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.