EVE Search - LAG: CCP's solution to moving level 4 missions to lowsec?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

LAG: CCP's solution to moving level 4 missions to lowsec?

» 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 - 3 post(s)
Bernardo Guii	Posted - 2007.02.04 15:55:00 - [1] The lag in systems like Motsu, Saila and Laah is unplayable. (Yes, I know all about moving to different agents in less populated systems. We dont need to discuss this here - the fact is that many people dont want to lose the 200K of LPs that they have with that ONE or TWO agents... Don't expect them to give up on months of effort so they can play the game without lag). I have read articles and interview of Devs who said that they really want to push level 4 missions out into lowsec or even 0.0. I really think CCPs plan is to let all the mission runners suffer from excessive lag - to the point that they won't ***** when the level 4 agents are all moved to 0.0 or lowsec - just so they can play the game. There seems to be no reason why these systems have suddenly spiked to unplayable levels of lag for days and weeks on end. I am beginning to think that the lag, while probably not intentionally created, is probably being overlooked at this time.
Samirol OctoberSnow Corp	Posted - 2007.02.04 15:57:00 - [2] Edited by: Samirol on 04/02/2007 15:54:28 no, they are going to use factional warfare to get them out. Then some will realize how much more you can profit in low sec if you watch your back, and that should relieve some strain. You only die in low sec if you aren't careful, and mission running is an extremely easy activity to make safe. I buy insane sigs, mail me ingame.
Rhaegar Targarin Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.04 16:09:00 - [3] I believe they will be reducing the number of NPCs in missions as well as many many other changes that will improved gameplay and performance. Find the developer blogs and read them if you want specific information. Rhaegar Targarin - Minmatar Combat Pilot
Pussey Spankratchet	Posted - 2007.02.04 17:11:00 - [4] Originally by: Rhaegar Targarin I believe they will be reducing the number of NPCs in missions as well as many many other changes that will improved gameplay and performance. Find the developer blogs and read them if you want specific information. Yep but they are going to make the ones you do get more hardcore.
Brutor Shaun Minmatar Freelancers UK Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.04 17:26:00 - [5] The easy way is to make LP for loyalty to a division, a faction, or even a race, rather than to an agent. Then you can move agents and take your LP with you.
Soporo	Posted - 2007.02.04 17:29:00 - [6] Quote: The easy way is to make LP for loyalty to a division, a faction, or even a race, rather than to an agent. /Signed.
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.02.04 17:45:00 - [7] Dump agents and missions altogether imo. They don't bring anything to the game except Bhaalgorns...and that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Material Defender "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Got Alliance? Contact me ingame for alliance creation services.
Derovius Vaden	Posted - 2007.02.04 18:31:00 - [8] I lag everytime I launch/recall my drones, regardless of the system I'm in. You're not the only victim of the lag beast.
Jollyreaper Gallente Ace Adventure Corp	Posted - 2007.02.04 18:34:00 - [9] Originally by: Brutor Shaun The easy way is to make LP for loyalty to a division, a faction, or even a race, rather than to an agent. Then you can move agents and take your LP with you. Excellent idea.
vipeer Celestial Horizon Corp.	Posted - 2007.02.04 20:01:00 - [10] How about perma banning users of market macros and contract macros? I am sure sending constant queries on market and contracts system puts a lot of unneded strain on the servers. Boot those exploiters and you have much more playable eve. Macro miners don't even come close to putting as much strain on servers as the above do. Chaining BoBo in south Feyth:
Sorja E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.02.04 20:13:00 - [11] Originally by: Thor Xian Dump agents and missions altogether imo. They don't bring anything to the game except Bhaalgorns...and that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make. No sorry, I'm not going to mine to earn my cash, and ratting is not less boring than mining. ____________________ A gentleman is someone who can play the bagpipe, but who does not.
nutbar Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2007.02.05 00:11:00 - [12] Originally by: Thor Xian Dump agents and missions altogether imo. They don't bring anything to the game except Bhaalgorns...and that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make. Sorry, not everyone plays the game the way you do. I enjoy my missions, and I don't want to have to be in a player corp so I can do them in 0.0, or avoid getting ganked in low sec by being in with a corp that camps some low sec. Most importantly, CCP needs to address the lag issues by fixing the CODE! They need to stop the thoughts that fixing parts within the virtual world will make any huge difference (the only difference they make is the number of rants/petitions they get because they nerfed one thing or another). They have nerfed so many parts of this game that it's becoming so horribly "unrealistic" which is rather sad (and don't give me this "we're in ships in space shooting lasers - what's realistic about that?!" garbage - you know what I mean). In short, all the fixes CCP has implemented (aside from new hardware and multihoming stuff) have been smoke-screens and ruses to hide the quite possible fact that actually fixing the code itself is beyond their capabilities at present. My fix? Hire better programmers and program in a better language. Writing EVE in Python is like writing Windows in COBOL - amazing if you can do it, but absolutely and utterly retarded to expect it to perform well :P
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.02.05 00:17:00 - [13] Originally by: Sorja Originally by: Thor Xian Dump agents and missions altogether imo. They don't bring anything to the game except Bhaalgorns...and that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make. No sorry, I'm not going to mine to earn my cash, and ratting is not less boring than mining. I don't do either personally. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Material Defender "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Got Alliance? Contact me ingame for alliance creation services.
Kylania Gallente Phoenix Industries	Posted - 2007.02.05 00:19:00 - [14] All but 2 Gallente level 4 combat agents are in low sec. Like 9 out of 11 Caldari level 4 combat agents were in high sec. It's only fair to move the uber-lagged Caldari agents into low sec to help with both lag and fairness across factions. -- Lil Miner Newbie Skills Roadmap \| How to Build from a BPO
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.02.05 00:23:00 - [15] Originally by: nutbar Originally by: Thor Xian Dump agents and missions altogether imo. They don't bring anything to the game except Bhaalgorns...and that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make. Sorry, not everyone plays the game the way you do. Everyone plays it the way I do...unless you don't play it the way you want. Quote: I enjoy my missions, and I don't want to have to be in a player corp so I can do them in 0.0, or avoid getting ganked in low sec by being in with a corp that camps some low sec. Other players do play this game. Sometimes interaction isn't consentual. Quote: Most importantly, CCP needs to address the lag issues by fixing the CODE! They need to stop the thoughts that fixing parts within the virtual world will make any huge difference (the only difference they make is the number of rants/petitions they get because they nerfed one thing or another). They have nerfed so many parts of this game that it's becoming so horribly "unrealistic" which is rather sad (and don't give me this "we're in ships in space shooting lasers - what's realistic about that?!" garbage - you know what I mean). In short, all the fixes CCP has implemented (aside from new hardware and multihoming stuff) have been smoke-screens and ruses to hide the quite possible fact that actually fixing the code itself is beyond their capabilities at present. My fix? Hire better programmers and program in a better language. Writing EVE in Python is like writing Windows in COBOL - amazing if you can do it, but absolutely and utterly retarded to expect it to perform well :P Eve is a great game idea, but frankly less than ideally implemented. Eve looks better on paper than it does in practice. So much could be so much better it isn't even funny. I don't disagree with you on principle, unless you want less player interaction. I lobbyed against WTZ for that reason mainly (and because fast travel is not better for Eve), even though I think gate camps...hell stargates in general are bad or bad game design in the case of stargates. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Material Defender "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Got Alliance? Contact me ingame for alliance creation services.
nutbar Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2007.02.05 02:25:00 - [16] Originally by: Thor Xian I don't disagree with you on principle, unless you want less player interaction. I don't want any less player interaction - never said that. I just don't want to be told I have to have it. I do what I can to prevent it to keep myself "safe". I don't need people who think that PVP is how EVE should be played whining to CCP asking for more ways to grief missioners and noob corp players just because they sat on a cactus or whatever other reason they might have for putting up such a huge stink all the time. There's nothing in the game description that says PVP is required, therefore why should it be? There are PVP and PVE servers for almost every other MMORPG - sure EVE sets out to be unique, but having PVP FORCED on players is "bad for business" if it's money and player-base they want. Don't think so? Just go ask what the stats are on players playing on PVP servers vs PVE servers in games with the choice. If I want to take risks and try to PVP, I should have to go to low sec where the chances of getting killed are "supposed" to be even between myself and my target. If I'm in high-sec, I should be safe. There's "police" in high-sec (however, I think they were all drunk at CCP when implementing CONCORD, either that or none of them have ever seen a real police force in action - or read any laws :P) and I would expect them to try and keep the peace. So, think of high-sec as a PVE server, and low-sec as a PVP server. If I want to PVP, I'll go where I have to in order to do it. I don't need PVP taken to me no matter how much you want a new target to shoot at. Make alts and shoot yourself if you're that bored :P
Bernardo Guii	Posted - 2007.02.05 06:21:00 - [17] Originally by: Thor Xian Dump agents and missions altogether imo. They don't bring anything to the game except Bhaalgorns...and that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make. Oh, so nice of you to tell us all how to play the game we ALSO pay for... (why does EVE have so many people who want to eliminate any PVE from it?) Back on topic now... I do not see how CCP can possibly refuse ANY petitions that come out of these affected systems now. With up to 4 minute module lag, there is simply no way to avoid accidents that are CAUSED by the game. Missions are not like PvP - where you can simply choose to jump a few systems over to find less lag. Missions are a LOT like defending/attacking a POS, since there is no choice but to be in the affected system (yes, I am aware that I can run different agents - just as soon as I get a decent offer for my 200K LPs, thank you very much). The difference I have seen - and yes, this is an alt - is that in 0.0, the devs jump to fix problems. The problems plaguing the mission hubs have been getting worse, and have been shamefully unacceptable for weeks now. This is why I am beginning to think that the devs are not only aware of the problem, but they are using this problem as a tool to make us all BEG them to move the mission hubs out to lowsec/0.0 If this is true, it is an incredibly dishonest and underhanded way to reduce complaints from a large segment of their paying customer base. Yes, mission runners in general would be VERY upset to have level 4s moved to lowsec. With the recent ability to scan probe out any ships in system, all pirates have to do is sit on their fat asses and wait till a mission runner is fully engaged in a mission, then sneak in and gank him. Is this really an acceptable solution to the problem of lag? Creating more cheap opportunities for cheap play? I like 0.0. I like PvP. I like alliance/corp rivalries and NBSI - but forcing solo players to take the same risks that an entire corp/alliance would face in 0.0 doesnÆt seem to be a responsible solution. (in 0.0, you fly with friends or you die alone - ganking is not only acceptable, it is advisable) I know that MMOs today all have a business model to FORCE team play - and letÆs be honest here, this is because the social aspects of team-based play will keep customers in the game longer and paying for their subscriptions long after the average solo player has left the game. Just look at WOW - that is a business model designed to rake in the cash - NO end-game content for anything less than 5-man teams, and most is 20-40 man raid groups. Is EVE going to put profit ahead of customers, the same way that WOW has? Designing games that force players out of solo play is ... well, it seems wrong to me. I see pushing missions out to lowsec as an attempt to force players into more ôsocialö play. Just for the record, I have my main characters in a 0.0 corp/alliance. I am no stranger to ôsocialö play. But, I also know that the average ôsocialö event takes MUCH MUCH longer to accomplish anything. I can run a level 4 mission in 30 minutes to 2 hours (with complete salvage ops). This is often all the time I have for the game in a given day. Does CCP really want to lose players like me who pay to play when they can and are not always able to engage in the ôsocialö style of play that they (CCP) so obviously favor.
Petrothian Tong Gallente	Posted - 2007.02.05 06:28:00 - [18] Edited by: Petrothian Tong on 05/02/2007 06:27:27 another day, another thread got hijacked by the "lets **** on the people who dont play our way thread"... missions are already nerfed enough..(compared to RMR/before... is craptastic now..) I would say that mission running is one of the few worthwhile things to do for casual players... heck, is getting to the point where mining in high sec earns more per hour... seriously, the ppl who want to force ppl to pvp... give up... it will never work, so long as people can log off/Cancel. it will never work. oh, and dont say the whole eve is pvp in the shooty shooty type... I market pvp =P ... I drove atleast 2 other traders out of the regions I had in... pvp can be that too. not just shootyshooty in low sec/0.0 as for the lag... well is a hardware/code problem... only real solution is to improve both... -- Today my drones attacked a brothel without even being told too. Either they objected to the establishment or they heard about the hot drinks machine in there... Yakumo
Bernardo Guii	Posted - 2007.02.05 06:57:00 - [19] EDIT to my last post: I am not against the idea of moving some agents to lowsec, or 0.0. Heck, I even LIKE the idea that the highest quality agents would be in lowsec - it just kinda makes sense, doesn't it? With greater reward come MUCH greater risk... The problem I have with FORCING all agents into lowsec to deal with lag issues (if this is, in fact, what CCP is doing) is that they aren't addressing the problem. If they wanted to fix the problem of lag, they would create MORE agents, and spread them out. People like me will move once we can cash in our LPs. Another relatively SIMPLE idea was posted in this thread - and in many others - and that is to simply assign LPs to divisions, corps or even factions. Allow players to move thier existing LPs to another agent and many will move. Perhaps there would be some kind of increasing penalty for moving LPs - low penalty to move to Division-based LPs - higher to Corp - highest for Faction moves. Just a suggestion. By moving ALL agents into lowesec to deal with lag, CCP would simply invalidate the game for many people. Many people DONT WANT TO PVP - read my other posts in this thread before you accuse me of this - and some, like me, want to be able to enjoy some solo play on those days that we do not have the time/energy to engage in "social" play.
Tommy TenKreds Animal Mercantile Executive	Posted - 2007.02.05 07:30:00 - [20] Edited by: Tommy TenKreds on 05/02/2007 07:26:19 Originally by: nutbar So, think of high-sec as a PVE server, and low-sec as a PVP server. If I want to PVP, I'll go where I have to in order to do it. I don't need PVP taken to me no matter how much you want a new target to shoot at. Make alts and shoot yourself if you're that bored :P You are describing some lesser, consentual game; certainly not Eve. Originally by: Tyrrax Thorrk Is there anything other than ISK you might be interested in?
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.02.05 07:42:00 - [21] Originally by: Bernardo Guii Originally by: Thor Xian Dump agents and missions altogether imo. They don't bring anything to the game except Bhaalgorns...and that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make. Oh, so nice of you to tell us all how to play the game we ALSO pay for... Paying for something doesn't mean you always get what you want. Quote: (why does EVE have so many people who want to eliminate any PVE from it?) I don't have a problem with PvE, I have a problem with ISK factories pouring money from nowhere into the economy. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Material Defender "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Got Alliance? Contact me ingame for alliance creation services.
Bernardo Guii	Posted - 2007.02.05 08:03:00 - [22] Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Edited by: Tommy TenKreds on 05/02/2007 07:26:19 Originally by: nutbar So, think of high-sec as a PVE server, and low-sec as a PVP server. If I want to PVP, I'll go where I have to in order to do it. I don't need PVP taken to me no matter how much you want a new target to shoot at. Make alts and shoot yourself if you're that bored :P You are describing some lesser, consentual game; certainly not Eve. And you are the authority to decide WHAT game we are playing??
Ghan Tylous Caldari The Graduates Ivy League	Posted - 2007.02.05 09:23:00 - [23] Edited by: Ghan Tylous on 05/02/2007 09:21:26 Edited by: Ghan Tylous on 05/02/2007 09:21:20 Edited by: Ghan Tylous on 05/02/2007 09:21:08 Originally by: Thor Xian I don't have a problem with PvE, I have a problem with ISK factories pouring money from nowhere into the economy. Let me get this straight: you make more ISK doing missions than ratting and mining in 0.0? and Its my Ç, my money, when I want to play the game the way you say I have to play it, I will. Otherwise I want to do that I want to and do missions when I have time for it. Me wonders why you don't mention the T2 BPO owners that make billions of ISK... --- It have always fallen to a few to sacrifice for the good of many

Oveur	Posted - 2007.02.05 09:35:00 - [24] Originally by: nutbar Originally by: Thor Xian Dump agents and missions altogether imo. They don't bring anything to the game except Bhaalgorns...and that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make. Sorry, not everyone plays the game the way you do. I enjoy my missions, and I don't want to have to be in a player corp so I can do them in 0.0, or avoid getting ganked in low sec by being in with a corp that camps some low sec. Most importantly, CCP needs to address the lag issues by fixing the CODE! They need to stop the thoughts that fixing parts within the virtual world will make any huge difference (the only difference they make is the number of rants/petitions they get because they nerfed one thing or another). They have nerfed so many parts of this game that it's becoming so horribly "unrealistic" which is rather sad (and don't give me this "we're in ships in space shooting lasers - what's realistic about that?!" garbage - you know what I mean). In short, all the fixes CCP has implemented (aside from new hardware and multihoming stuff) have been smoke-screens and ruses to hide the quite possible fact that actually fixing the code itself is beyond their capabilities at present. My fix? Hire better programmers and program in a better language. Writing EVE in Python is like writing Windows in COBOL - amazing if you can do it, but absolutely and utterly retarded to expect it to perform well :P You are so awesome. Will you come fix EVE for me?! On a more serious note. Reasoning for moving agents down in security is the risk vs reward factor, nothing to do with load. It's the basic principle that higher rewarding content should be in lower security systems. Dispersing agents is load related and has nothing to do with the actual level of the agents. We've been moving around level 1, 2, 3 and 4 agents from the same systems to disperse the load to different solar systems. This is because our infrastructure is built up on solar system grains, where each solar system can at most work on 1 CPU. This hasn't got anything to do with Python, but everything with our architecture. Incidentally, we have on our roadmap tp split the solar systems into finer grains, but till now, it's only been a handful of solar systems which has needed more CPUs. What's far more important is dyanamic re-allocation of solar systems to less loaded nodes to react to unpredictable high load situations, such as fleet battles. So for short, you are mixing two initiatives (actually, three) and assuming the wrong reasoning for both of them. Senior Producer EVE Online

10of12	Posted - 2007.02.05 09:57:00 - [25] Edited by: 10of12 on 05/02/2007 09:56:12 Edited by: 10of12 on 05/02/2007 09:53:56 Originally by: Oveur [ You are so awesome. Will you come fix EVE for me?! On a more serious note. Reasoning for moving agents down in security is the risk vs reward factor, nothing to do with load. It's the basic principle that higher rewarding content should be in lower security systems. Only one problem with the risk-reward thing when moving lvl4 agents to low-sec, mission runners in an alliance controlled area do not have any more risk as somebody in empire. On the other hand, people who just like to run a mission now and then and just play the game for the missions will have a great amount of risk trying to do missions in this same area. Because we have a lot of people in the last group, moving all lvl4's to high-sec will result in them starting on high-q lvl3 agents causing the same problem again. I think when running missions it's not the PvP side which must be the threat, but the mission itself. So if the risk/reward of missions is too high, make the missions less predictable/a bit harder. Not everybody is playing Eve for the PvP (battle PvP that is) What i also don't get is why there are so few high-q agents and why are they in a small place together. Get some more agents and spread them out across multiple systems and people will start to move, especially if the LP is made corp based instead of agent based. Btw, my main is both a mission-runner and a PvP'er

Oveur	Posted - 2007.02.05 10:04:00 - [26] Originally by: 10of12 Edited by: 10of12 on 05/02/2007 09:53:56 Originally by: Oveur You are so awesome. Will you come fix EVE for me?! On a more serious note. Reasoning for moving agents down in security is the risk vs reward factor, nothing to do with load. It's the basic principle that higher rewarding content should be in lower security systems. Only one problem with the risk-reward thing when moving lvl4 agents to low-sec, mission runners in an alliance controlled area do not have any more risk as somebody in empire. On the other hand, people who just like to run a mission now and then and just play the game for the missions will have a great amount of risk trying to do missions in this same area. Because we have a lot of people in the last group, moving all lvl4's to high-sec will result in them starting on high-q lvl3 agents causing the same problem again. I think when running missions it's not the PvP side which must be the threat, but the mission itself. So if the risk/reward of missions is too high, make the missions less predictable/a bit harder. Not everybody is playing Eve for the PvP (battle PvP that is) Very valid points, one of the main reasons why suddenly now moving all lvl 4s to 0.4 and below isn't really feasible, there whole system needs some fundamental changes, which we are conceptualizing these days. Without going into to much detail, new agent levels, less predictability, more challenging missions, more variety, and more mission types (exploratory, mini-profession-ish and new tasks) are what we're looking at. This is all a byproduct of having more people on-board whose focus is PVE. It all has to jive with the basic principles of EVE though, but don't worry, nobody is going to force you into 0.0. Originally by: 10of12 What i also don't get is why there are so few high-q agents and why are they in a small place together. Get some more agents and spread them out across multiple systems and people will start to move, especially if the LP is made corp based instead of agent based. This is exactly what we've been doing, spreading agents out which have clustering, to address load. LP on Corp level is as good as approved from me, we're looking at developer slots and a detailed design right now. Senior Producer EVE Online

SonOTassadar The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc. Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2007.02.05 10:11:00 - [27] Originally by: Oveur -snip- ----- Griffin -- 100,000 ISK ECM - Multispectral Jammer Is -- 20,000 ISK Standar Missile Launcher Is -- 10,000 ISK War target sobbing over losing a fight in his T2 fitted Battleship -- priceless
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2007.02.05 10:19:00 - [28] Originally by: Thor Xian Originally by: Sorja Originally by: Thor Xian Dump agents and missions altogether imo. They don't bring anything to the game except Bhaalgorns...and that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make. No sorry, I'm not going to mine to earn my cash, and ratting is not less boring than mining. I don't do either personally. Logic 101: to pirate you need someone to pirate to earn isk pirating you need that the one pirated has something worth isk if the only activity genrating isk is pirating (as mission are deleted and ratting and mining are uninteresting) the only target worth pirating are the pirates first or later the accumulated modules will be all destructed and we will all pirate in rookie ship. So a ebil pirates sould scream for fat rewards in mission, to get fat targets, not for deleting missions.
FireFoxx80 Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.02.05 10:45:00 - [29] Edited by: FireFoxx80 on 05/02/2007 10:41:58 I cant see why people are panicking and threatening to leave Eve over possibility that lvl4 agents might move to low-sec (note, not 0.0). As Oveur said, Risk vs Reward. People worrying about pilots is unfounded: - Level 4 agents near to low-sec already send you into low-sec occasionally. - A pirate will have to be pretty organised to pop the 100+ Caldari Navy Raven's all mission'ing in the same system. I am sure the mission runners will unite and pop all but the most 1337 groups. People are reacting as if the sky is falling. PS: like the new sig? What I do the rest of the time - Vote for a Jita bypass!
Del369 Caldari Office linebackers Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.05 11:41:00 - [30] When they make PVP and mission running possible with the same setup then by all means move it to lowsec, while it takes 2 very different setups to do each one becoming cannon fodder for low sec gank gangs while i'm running missions on r&r from 0.0 isn't my idea of fun. However agreed, they should add more level 4 agents in all space high sec and low sec, that would definately release the burden of the few systems they are currently located in. Originally by: Wrangler That is an outright lie! We don't want to discriminate anyone! We want both anti-social and social players to grief each other!

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.