EVE Search - Recon Probes completely borked after the patch

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Recon Probes completely borked after the patch

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:16:00 - [1] I did some tests today using the RPL with the various probes to find out what it would take to scan down mission runners in dead space like we should be able to. After a few hours of testing with all available probes in controlled conditions (I was in gang with the mission runner and knew exactly where he was), I have to say that all of the probes are completely screwed. Using the most powerful of all the probes (snoop) I managed to get a result ZERO out of 50 times, while knowing exactly where the target was. I tried from a few AU out, and from directly near the deadspace gate. I also tried with the various other probes (zero results again of course), and with multiple probes of the same type. My Astrometric skills are good, with Astrometric Triangulation at 4. Once again, there is no reason to undock when a mission runner jumps into the system. Prior to Kali it was nearly impossible to scan a mission runner down due to them being off-plain, and now that players in deadspace missions are impossible to probe out we're right back where we started. Couple this with the addition of warp to 0km, and all we have left are players who go to the belts, which hardly anyone does anyway because they know they'll be attacked the instant they do. I'd like to hear from the Devs exactly how they think I should go about attacking mission runners, since I'm clearly all out of tools to do so. Or do they simply not want me to do this any more? If the devs just don't want people to pirate, just come out and stay it so I can go find another game and do something else. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Gray Carmicheal Wings of Redemption	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:20:00 - [2] I'm honestly a bit inclined to agree. I understand that now you should scan out their drones and all, but that wasn't the purpose of the new scanning. Yes, I agree that post-Kali scanning was WAY too easy, but we've basically reverted to it being nearly impossible. But I'm not going to hold my breath/etc. I'll simply wait and see how the devs adjust it over the coming weeks/month/etc to make it find that sweet spot that everyone (mostly) can be content with or tolerate. Ranis by Trey Azagthoth Cortes has haxed my sig. :(
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:23:00 - [3] Originally by: Bellum Eternus I did some tests today using the RPL with the various probes to find out what it would take to scan down mission runners in dead space like we should be able to. After a few hours of testing with all available probes in controlled conditions (I was in gang with the mission runner and knew exactly where he was), I have to say that all of the probes are completely screwed. Using the most powerful of all the probes (snoop) I managed to get a result ZERO out of 50 times, while knowing exactly where the target was. I tried from a few AU out, and from directly near the deadspace gate. I also tried with the various other probes (zero results again of course), and with multiple probes of the same type. My Astrometric skills are good, with Astrometric Triangulation at 4. Once again, there is no reason to undock when a mission runner jumps into the system. Prior to Kali it was nearly impossible to scan a mission runner down due to them being off-plain, and now that players in deadspace missions are impossible to probe out we're right back where we started. Couple this with the addition of warp to 0km, and all we have left are players who go to the belts, which hardly anyone does anyway because they know they'll be attacked the instant they do. I'd like to hear from the Devs exactly how they think I should go about attacking mission runners, since I'm clearly all out of tools to do so. Or do they simply not want me to do this any more? If the devs just don't want people to pirate, just come out and stay it so I can go find another game and do something else. buhu I found this bit particularly funny >"Couple this with the addition of warp to 0km, and all we have left are players who go to the belts, which hardly anyone does anyway because they know they'll be attacked the instant they do."< what did you expect, most players arent stupid you know from another thread I read that it is now 100 times harder to scan someone down in a deadspace, so you have to do a bit of work .... i bet if you had used another 50 probes you would have found him Alas, poor risk vs reward, I knew you well
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:23:00 - [4] Have you tried overlaying multiple Snoop probes to intersect about where the mission runner should be? i.e. lay down a triangle of 3 that intersect at the mission runner's approximate location. As I understand it that should give you a decent boost to the signal strength they can detect, which would seem appropriate for finding deadspace mission runners difficulty wise.
FFGR Maza Nostra Euphoria Unleashed	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:27:00 - [5] Originally by: Radioactive Babe from another thread I read that it is now 100 times harder to scan someone down in a deadspace, so you have to do a bit of work .... i bet if you had used another 50 probes you would have found him You do realize that with so many probes, he has enough time to do the mission, return, go back and loot, complete and grab another mission ? _______ Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment
Stamm Amarr Three Holdings Rule of Three	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:29:00 - [6] They have to get the balance right. If they make it too easy, every single 14 year old griefer will be flying about spamming I pawned j00!!!!11!!¼!eleven in local. And if they get it too difficult then, yeah, like Bellum said the only way to get nailed in lowsec or NPC 0.0 is at a gate.
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:30:00 - [7] Originally by: FFGR Originally by: Radioactive Babe from another thread I read that it is now 100 times harder to scan someone down in a deadspace, so you have to do a bit of work .... i bet if you had used another 50 probes you would have found him You do realize that with so many probes, he has enough time to do the mission, return, go back and loot, complete and grab another mission ? as is so often spouted by pierats, bring some friends ... the covops is not a soloscanmobile Alas, poor risk vs reward, I knew you well
Miss Overlord Gallente Ferrum Pugnus New Eve Order	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:30:00 - [8] CCP swing it to far one way then to far the other basically if u wanna hide just have an active mission and safespot there even if a war target - i think astrometric pinpointing and triangulation should be a bit useful now ive got both up to level 4 ill have a go after dt and see what i can find out. Sounds like they just nerfed scanning back to the dark ages just to satisfy the whiny mission running carebears again not good CCP not good These posts represent my personal views and not those of my corp or alliance. These do not reflect offical alliance or corp views This is a disclaimer
Chewan Mesa Beagle Corp	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:33:00 - [9] Originally by: James Duar Have you tried overlaying multiple Snoop probes to intersect about where the mission runner should be? i.e. lay down a triangle of 3 that intersect at the mission runner's approximate location. As I understand it that should give you a decent boost to the signal strength they can detect, which would seem appropriate for finding deadspace mission runners difficulty wise. Afaik intersecting probes cancel each other out, so they wont work in another probes radius...the triangle worked pre-rev. Or am I wrong here? Siganture removed due to profanity - Serathu ([email protected])
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:34:00 - [10] Originally by: James Duar Have you tried overlaying multiple Snoop probes to intersect about where the mission runner should be? i.e. lay down a triangle of 3 that intersect at the mission runner's approximate location. As I understand it that should give you a decent boost to the signal strength they can detect, which would seem appropriate for finding deadspace mission runners difficulty wise. Yes, I did exactly that, with no improvement. I also tried various combinations of all the different probes etc. Nothing helped. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Miss Overlord Gallente Ferrum Pugnus New Eve Order	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:36:00 - [11] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: James Duar Have you tried overlaying multiple Snoop probes to intersect about where the mission runner should be? i.e. lay down a triangle of 3 that intersect at the mission runner's approximate location. As I understand it that should give you a decent boost to the signal strength they can detect, which would seem appropriate for finding deadspace mission runners difficulty wise. Yes, I did exactly that, with no improvement. I also tried various combinations of all the different probes etc. Nothing helped. what level of astrometric triangulation and astrometric pinpointing skills do u have btw These posts represent my personal views and not those of my corp or alliance. These do not reflect offical alliance or corp views This is a disclaimer
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:37:00 - [12] Originally by: Radioactive Babe Originally by: FFGR Originally by: Radioactive Babe from another thread I read that it is now 100 times harder to scan someone down in a deadspace, so you have to do a bit of work .... i bet if you had used another 50 probes you would have found him You do realize that with so many probes, he has enough time to do the mission, return, go back and loot, complete and grab another mission ? as is so often spouted by pierats, bring some friends ... the covops is not a soloscanmobile What does bringing friends have anything to do with this post? I did the testing so I could more fully understand the changes in the patch, so that I could more effectively scan down targets FOR MY FRIENDS. And yes, a single Cov Ops should be a 'solo pwnmobile' when it comes to probing/scanning. It shouldn't take me more than a few minutes at MOST to probe out a mission runner using the currently availble probes and launchers, assuming I have Astrometrics V and all other Astrometric support skills at 4. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
merc999 Caldari SniggWaffe	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:37:00 - [13] Originally by: James Duar Have you tried overlaying multiple Snoop probes to intersect about where the mission runner should be? i.e. lay down a triangle of 3 that intersect at the mission runner's approximate location. As I understand it that should give you a decent boost to the signal strength they can detect, which would seem appropriate for finding deadspace mission runners difficulty wise. I believe with the new recon launcher used probes you cannot use another probe within the scan area of another probe you have dropped so it is impossible to overlap them and triangulate however I stand to be corrected if mistaken
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:38:00 - [14] Originally by: Miss Overlord Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: James Duar Have you tried overlaying multiple Snoop probes to intersect about where the mission runner should be? i.e. lay down a triangle of 3 that intersect at the mission runner's approximate location. As I understand it that should give you a decent boost to the signal strength they can detect, which would seem appropriate for finding deadspace mission runners difficulty wise. Yes, I did exactly that, with no improvement. I also tried various combinations of all the different probes etc. Nothing helped. what level of astrometric triangulation and astrometric pinpointing skills do u have btw I have triangulation at 4, pinpointing at 3, training to 4, but TBH I don't think that pinpointing makes much of a difference in actually finding something, as it doesn't helpt the sensor strength of the probes any. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:40:00 - [15] Originally by: merc999 Originally by: James Duar Have you tried overlaying multiple Snoop probes to intersect about where the mission runner should be? i.e. lay down a triangle of 3 that intersect at the mission runner's approximate location. As I understand it that should give you a decent boost to the signal strength they can detect, which would seem appropriate for finding deadspace mission runners difficulty wise. I believe with the new recon launcher used probes you cannot use another probe within the scan area of another probe you have dropped so it is impossible to overlap them and triangulate however I stand to be corrected if mistaken You can overlap the scan areas, but it is very difficult to do, especially with the smaller probes. You can not drop a probe inside the sphere of another probe. Regardless of type. I did manage to get 3 probes dropped with all 3 spheres overlapping the target area by making precise safespots to scan the mission area. Results were still zero. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Chewan Mesa Beagle Corp	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:41:00 - [16] Edited by: Chewan Mesa on 15/12/2006 11:41:57 Nvm, the post above cleared that up, thx. Siganture removed due to profanity - Serathu ([email protected])
Sean Dillon Caldari Privateers	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:44:00 - [17] You know u can only launch one probe within its range. So the next one has to be 5 AU out if u use snoop. Right now this only benefits the loggofski's.
Aypse Sanguine Legion	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:45:00 - [18] From the last 2 days of playing with probes, post-patch, it appears as though the 5au (snoop) probe is bugged. It rarely returns results, even when deployed in bunches and within 1au of the target. I really think this is a bug, because you can run the snoops many times and they can't find the guy sitting right next to you at a safespot in a BS/BC. Considering they are the high-res version, afaik they should return a result near 100% of the time, but the deviation can be 0-100km. Solution: Use the 10au probes. They return results reliably. Of course they are not as accurate so you may have to use two. Originally by: Oveur Eve is primarily a PVP game and hence our focus is on making that experience balanced.
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:50:00 - [19] Originally by: Bellum Eternus What does bringing friends have anything to do with this post? I did the testing so I could more fully understand the changes in the patch, so that I could more effectively scan down targets FOR MY FRIENDS. And yes, a single Cov Ops should be a 'solo pwnmobile' when it comes to probing/scanning. It shouldn't take me more than a few minutes at MOST to probe out a mission runner using the currently availble probes and launchers, assuming I have Astrometrics V and all other Astrometric support skills at 4. If CCP allowed a single cov ops to be able to scan someone down in a deadspace in 5 minutes we would be back to the situation before the last patch in very short order (however long it takes the griefers to train up to cov ops) ... So, I believe CCP did not want that (otherwise they would not have changed it - regardless of screaming on the forums - CCP have not fixed Amarr no matter how much screaming THEY did - 100 page whinefest anyone?) ... Of course you are also all assuming that they new probes are best used for finding people mission running, which was not the reason they were introduced ... and dont tell me war targets are going to hopping on missions to avoid retribution, if they are in a station and dont want a fight, thats where they will stay, not sitting in a deadspace pocket ... and there are not that many missions in deep 0.0 where people can hide in either are there Alas, poor risk vs reward, I knew you well
Razor Jaxx Fate.	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:53:00 - [20] Edited by: Razor Jaxx on 15/12/2006 11:53:43 I have to agree this is a bad quick fix. If the point of CCP was to protect high-sec mission runners, there were other, more elegant fixes : - make mission critical items accessible only to the mission runner - flag party-crashers (anyone not ganged with the mission-runner) - make deadspace full 0.0 (no CONCORD intervention) - warp scramble party-crashers (deadspace "guardian" towers) By making deadspace impossible to scan down, this fix has not only an impact in high-sec, but also in low-sec and 0.0, where pilots should definitely NOT be safe. I hope this "fix" will be rolled back, and a more appropriate solution put in place. Fate kills
Ishana Minmatar The Black Rabbits	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:53:00 - [21] Originally by: Sean Dillon You know u can only launch one probe within its range. So the next one has to be 5 AU out if u use snoop. Right now this only benefits the loggofski's. And how are you suppost to get these "triangulation points" these days? since the larger probes will find absolutely nothing what so ever? TBH I think we will be stuck with this system for a long time, since now all the mission *****s are all but invulnerable, and there will not be a flame fest about probing sucking. Just some people that actually think this game shouldn't be 100% completly save anywere. I've said it before and I'll say it again: CCP should go back to the old scanning system with the scanning planes, apply the new skills to this system so it's faster and more accurate. Change the triangulation skill so it increases the scanning plane by about 20% per lvl. (so 2au scanning plane at lvl 5) This will allow people in normal savespots to be found pretty quickly, and mission runners will not be save, but you have to work for it to find them. (not a push of a button) I used to do this before kali and I would find missions in about 10-20 minutes. with the new skills I'd say it could be 5-15 minutes, which in my eyes would be good since you actually have to know what you're doing to even get a result, and if you're unlucky the mission has already ended. _________________________________________________________ Please resize your signature to the limits specified in the forum rules, thanks. -wystler ([email protected])
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:55:00 - [22] The 10 and 20 AU probes work fine in the way they were intended to, finding people in safespots. They might not work so good anymore to find mission runners, but that is all fine and dandy, go fight people that WANT to fight (But gosh, they might fight back! No way!) :P As for the 5 AU probes, there really seems to be an issue there as I am having a hard time to get any success with those as well. --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:57:00 - [23] Originally by: Leandro Salazar The 10 and 20 AU probes work fine in the way they were intended to, finding people in safespots. They might not work so good anymore to find mission runners, but that is all fine and dandy, go fight people that WANT to fight (But gosh, they might fight back! No way!) :P QFT Alas, poor risk vs reward, I knew you well
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:58:00 - [24] Originally by: Aypse From the last 2 days of playing with probes, post-patch, it appears as though the 5au (snoop) probe is bugged. It rarely returns results, even when deployed in bunches and within 1au of the target. I really think this is a bug, because you can run the snoops many times and they can't find the guy sitting right next to you at a safespot in a BS/BC. Considering they are the high-res version, afaik they should return a result near 100% of the time, but the deviation can be 0-100km. Solution: Use the 10au probes. They return results reliably. Of course they are not as accurate so you may have to use two. I tried 5/10/20/40 AU probes, and combinations thereof. Nothing seems to work. I've been very precise and methodical in my testing so as to make sure that I was eliminating all possible variables. It's just simply too hard to scan for a target in deadspace. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Miss Overlord Gallente Ferrum Pugnus New Eve Order	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:58:00 - [25] carebears as is atm are safe even in 0.0 to run their missions so that is all that matters ( sarcasim) the whining has stopped CCP u just buggered probing but its all good the paying customers being the carebears dont shoot me u cant shoot me im in hgih sec NPC corp hahahahaha has now won the day thanks CCP ill go back to my other devious methods of harassing lame emo players These posts represent my personal views and not those of my corp or alliance. These do not reflect offical alliance or corp views This is a disclaimer
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.15 12:02:00 - [26] Originally by: Leandro Salazar The 10 and 20 AU probes work fine in the way they were intended to, finding people in safespots. They might not work so good anymore to find mission runners, but that is all fine and dandy, go fight people that WANT to fight (But gosh, they might fight back! No way!) :P As for the 5 AU probes, there really seems to be an issue there as I am having a hard time to get any success with those as well. This is exactly my point. For starters, I'm in low sec (.4 and less), not 'griefing' mission runners in high-sec (which I think is perfectly fine, but whatever). People running missions in low-sec should be allowed to be attacked by other players, whether they want it or not. If players are only able to be attacked when they choose to be, then this might as well be WoW FFS. Additionally, there arn't any players who 'want' to fight. I fly all over the place looking for people to kill, and they just dock as soon as I enter local. -10.00 security standing is a dead give away. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Xander XacXorien	Posted - 2006.12.15 12:04:00 - [27] I am more than completely fed up with this stupid argument. Please explain why in a game people are paying for any group of players should be able to attack any single player with such a HUGE advantage in their favour. The single player is already fighting a large group of NPC's with a none PvP setup and you think they should fight an unknown size of players as well ? In my honest opinion if such a thing is put in place then the opposite should be perfectly true to maintain some kind of balance. Pirates should be able to be scanned out anywhere, preferably on their own and before a group jumps in a group of NPC's should immediately begin attacking them first. Then the group of player anti pirates can jump in and join the fight. Perhaps something like a Concord mission to attack player pirates. When you consider the above and actually agree to it then by all means implement it,,, however I doubt many people would like paying for the privilege of being so vulnerable. Any argument about well missioners should group together - absolute crap - you make more ISK out of killing player pirates that you would out of missions. People wont pay for being ganked, get over it - end of story.
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.15 12:12:00 - [28] Originally by: Xander XacXorien I am more than completely fed up with this stupid argument. Please explain why in a game people are paying for any group of players should be able to attack any single player with such a HUGE advantage in their favour. The single player is already fighting a large group of NPC's with a none PvP setup and you think they should fight an unknown size of players as well ? In my honest opinion if such a thing is put in place then the opposite should be perfectly true to maintain some kind of balance. Pirates should be able to be scanned out anywhere, preferably on their own and before a group jumps in a group of NPC's should immediately begin attacking them first. Then the group of player anti pirates can jump in and join the fight. Perhaps something like a Concord mission to attack player pirates. When you consider the above and actually agree to it then by all means implement it,,, however I doubt many people would like paying for the privilege of being so vulnerable. Any argument about well missioners should group together - absolute crap - you make more ISK out of killing player pirates that you would out of missions. People wont pay for being ganked, get over it - end of story. I am more than completely fed up with this stupid argument. Please explain why in a game that is focused on PVP plays should assume that they're not going to be attacked by other players, especially in the DESIGNATED AREAS (low sec) assigned to do so? Now, it's perfectly fine to attack players in high-sec areas, but specifically I'm talking about players who submit to PVP by going into low-sec to run their missions. If you remove non-consentual PVP from the game, you're turning EvE into WoW. I play EvE specifically beause it's NOT WoW. When a customer pays his $15 or whatever it is a month, he's SIGNING UP for the chance to be killed by another player, any time, any where. YOU CAREBEARS AGREED TO BE ATTACKED BY OTHER PLAYERS WHEN YOU PAID FOR THE GAME. Read the game description. It's right there at the front. So anyway, this thread isn't about explaining why carebears should die (of course they should, why does that need explaining?), it's about how crappy the probe change is, and requesting answers as to when it will be fixed. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Radioactive Babe	Posted - 2006.12.15 12:12:00 - [29] Edited by: Radioactive Babe on 15/12/2006 12:19:28 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Leandro Salazar The 10 and 20 AU probes work fine in the way they were intended to, finding people in safespots. They might not work so good anymore to find mission runners, but that is all fine and dandy, go fight people that WANT to fight (But gosh, they might fight back! No way!) :P As for the 5 AU probes, there really seems to be an issue there as I am having a hard time to get any success with those as well. This is exactly my point. For starters, I'm in low sec (.4 and less), not 'griefing' mission runners in high-sec (which I think is perfectly fine, but whatever). People running missions in low-sec should be allowed to be attacked by other players, whether they want it or not. If players are only able to be attacked when they choose to be, then this might as well be WoW FFS. Additionally, there arn't any players who 'want' to fight. I fly all over the place looking for people to kill, and they just dock as soon as I enter local. -10.00 security standing is a dead give away. Shouldnt you be down in Tenerifis fighting off TCF/IMP/RA/Goons/half a dozen others? oh thats right, everyone else is killing them for you EDIT: <or is the real reason because there are people who actually shoot back OMG RUN TO LOW SEC AND GANK MISSION RUNNERS> Alas, poor risk vs reward, I knew you well
Ishana Minmatar The Black Rabbits	Posted - 2006.12.15 12:12:00 - [30] Originally by: Xander XacXorien I am more than completely fed up with this stupid argument. Please explain why in a game people are paying for any group of players should be able to attack any single player with such a HUGE advantage in their favour. The single player is already fighting a large group of NPC's with a none PvP setup and you think they should fight an unknown size of players as well ? In my honest opinion if such a thing is put in place then the opposite should be perfectly true to maintain some kind of balance. Pirates should be able to be scanned out anywhere, preferably on their own and before a group jumps in a group of NPC's should immediately begin attacking them first. Then the group of player anti pirates can jump in and join the fight. Perhaps something like a Concord mission to attack player pirates. When you consider the above and actually agree to it then by all means implement it,,, however I doubt many people would like paying for the privilege of being so vulnerable. Any argument about well missioners should group together - absolute crap - you make more ISK out of killing player pirates that you would out of missions. People wont pay for being ganked, get over it - end of story. You seem to forget that this game wasn't intended to be a happy cudly game, but instead it's a PvP game. If you want to be near 100% save you go to High-sec were you can do what ever you want and if your not a complete moron, be 100% save. In low-sec and 0.0 there should be a risk of dying for every one. If you're running missions there you should get higher rewards, because you are more at risk. That risk was way to high before the patch, but now the risk is completely gone. Please tell me why everybody in low-sec should be at risk except the mission runners? because that's the way it is at the moment. Or are you just special? _________________________________________________________ Please resize your signature to the limits specified in the forum rules, thanks. -wystler ([email protected])

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: 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.