EVE Search - Linky post for Devs re: Blasters

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Linky post for Devs re: Blasters

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2008.10.23 21:45:00 - [31] Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 23/10/2008 21:45:34 Why not list some of my calculations that show how exaggerated and faulty all that data is? It's basically propaganda. CCP is not falling for it you know, they can actually do their own calculations and get real and accurate results instead. ----------------------------------------- [Video] Tempest of Change
Zubakis Bambooule	Posted - 2008.10.23 21:59:00 - [32] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 23/10/2008 21:45:34 Why not list some of my calculations that show how exaggerated and faulty all that data is? It's basically propaganda. CCP is not falling for it you know, they can actually do their own calculations and get real and accurate results instead. Yeah, why dont you do it? Or are you waiting somebody will do it for you? -- Zuba
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2008.10.23 22:09:00 - [33] Originally by: Zubakis are you waiting somebody will do it for you? Yes I am.
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2008.10.23 22:10:00 - [34] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Yes I am. You see, Lyria, first you have to stop talking out of your ass before people will post your bad math that's built around entirely incorrect assumptions. :) -Liang
Zubakis Bambooule	Posted - 2008.10.23 22:49:00 - [35] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Zubakis are you waiting somebody will do it for you? Yes I am. Why would someone do it for you? Post your stuff or stop trolling.
Praxis1452 the united	Posted - 2008.10.23 23:09:00 - [36] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Zubakis are you waiting somebody will do it for you? Yes I am. lol, "I refute your calculations because you didn't do ones that support the opposite viewpoint." -------------------------------------------- ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it"
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.10.23 23:29:00 - [37] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 23/10/2008 21:45:34 Why not list some of my calculations that show how exaggerated and faulty all that data is? It's basically propaganda. CCP is not falling for it you know, they can actually do their own calculations and get real and accurate results instead. Show me where it's faulty. There is nothing exaggerated about the live fire test, there is nothing exaggerated about the hit chance plots (they use the formula the game engine uses), there is nothing exaggerated about the flaw in the tracking formula. There is nothing exaggerated about the closing of the DPS gap between Blasters/Torps/Pulses. In short put up or shut up. -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Praxis1452 the united	Posted - 2008.10.23 23:58:00 - [38] Originally by: Gabriel Karade Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 23/10/2008 21:45:34 Why not list some of my calculations that show how exaggerated and faulty all that data is? It's basically propaganda. CCP is not falling for it you know, they can actually do their own calculations and get real and accurate results instead. Show me where it's faulty. There is nothing exaggerated about the live fire test, there is nothing exaggerated about the hit chance plots (they use the formula the game engine uses), there is nothing exaggerated about the flaw in the tracking formula. There is nothing exaggerated about the closing of the DPS gap between Blasters/Torps/Pulses. In short put up or shut up. he's just bitter because it took so long for amarr to get a buff and is trying to do to gallente what people did to amarr. "No they don't need boost, they are balanced." -------------------------------------------- ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it"
Gar Ddhen Gallente North Yorkshire Trading	Posted - 2008.10.24 01:11:00 - [39] Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Edited by: Fullmetal Jackass on 11/10/2008 13:44:49 Originally by: Gabriel Karade Plots of hit quality on same scale, courtesy Grytok. post #487. Signature resolution reduction for short range turrets to mimic size vs distance, courtesy Gabriel, post #498 Ya know, I thought it was the idea of reducing the web strength so that it wasn't insta death for smaller ship vs larger ship? So a cruiser can orbit inside webrange and not be insta popped by large guns? Working as intended I say. Does a BS not have drones? No missiles? Can't fit a neut? Smart bombs? Edit: I know someone cited the ishtar as bein able to defeat smart bomb by lauching more heavy drones. Maybe the issue there is a HAS using a bonused battleship class weapon as it's primary damage? Or did I totally miss the point of the graphs? An Ishtar using Ogre II's flown by a pilot with maxed out drone damage skills is pushing out 467 DPS with drones. While you can fit blasters on top, that will punch DPS to mid 600's or so depending on the blasters and ammo you use. However there it is worth bearing in mind that the Ishtar has the lowest CPU of all the HAC's, and the second lowest grid, as soon as you start throwing blasters or dual reps or anything hefty you start running into serious fitting problems, especially CPU, which on that ship is crippling. 650 ish DPS is not overly damaging for a damage fit HAC, and to get it you either have to go fully faction... or forgo a tank. The main imbalance on the Ishtar isnt its DPS, but its current use as a nanoship, once that is curtailed then it will revert to being among the more balanced Gallente ships.
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2008.10.24 04:11:00 - [40] Originally by: Gabriel Karade Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 23/10/2008 21:45:34 Why not list some of my calculations that show how exaggerated and faulty all that data is? It's basically propaganda. CCP is not falling for it you know, they can actually do their own calculations and get real and accurate results instead. Show me where it's faulty. There is nothing exaggerated about the live fire test, there is nothing exaggerated about the hit chance plots (they use the formula the game engine uses), there is nothing exaggerated about the flaw in the tracking formula. There is nothing exaggerated about the closing of the DPS gap between Blasters/Torps/Pulses. In short put up or shut up. I'll quote myself from the other thread: "Blaster mega/Pulse geddon (both using t1 short range ammo) Sig rad: 400/400 Optimal: 4500/15000 Fall off: 12500/10000 Tracking: 0.07442/0.04219 Target is a Abing BC 265 sig 400m/s speed Result is: 1. The maximum hit chance occurs at 11.45km range for the blaster and is 57%. 2. The maximum hit chance occurs at 18.36km range for the pulse and is 61% 3. As you can clearly see the max hit chance on a weapon that has high fall off occurs much farther away from its optimal. 4. Now if you look at the graph and apply your faulty logic by comparing the hit chances in respective optimal, ie 4500m for the blaster and 15000m for the pulse, you can obviously see why this gives a totally wrong picture of the blaster performance. 5. Also take into consideration that a BC will have to have a slower transversal in a tighter orbit wich will favor the graph towards the blaster. Wich means approximately that they have the same max performance according to their range and are range_vs_tracking balanced." Another quote on why alot of your graphs and comparisons are faulty: "Don't make a fool out of yourself. Maximum hit chance (wich is what is important) for a certain target with a certain transversal is NOT at optimal. It is somewhere betweem optimal and optimal+fall off. If you have a [insert any gun ship] firing at a [insert any ship] with a certain transversal your hitchance as a function of distance will have a maximum BETWEEN your guns optimal range and optimal+fall off. Why? Because the hit chance reduction past optimal is only slight to begin with, wich means that you benefit more from the reduced angular velocity of your target then you lose tracking by being in fall off. If you do not understand this you should really LOOK at the graphs available in the tracking guide. You obviously STILL are oblivious of tracking mechanics. Read up and then come back. Kthxbai." So, short answer: No you can't have 4 mid megas with almost pulse ranges.
Murkon Salesgirl Amarr	Posted - 2008.10.24 04:31:00 - [41] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer 5. Also take into consideration that a BC will have to have a slower transversal in a tighter orbit wich will favor the graph towards the blaster. So, short answer: No you can't have 4 mid megas with almost pulse ranges. 5. A closer orbit also generates more transversal as a result of CCP's silly maths. It does not favour any weapon system in particular. Short answer: Thats why you got the Abaddon, more turret firepower, vastly better tank.. and oh yeah, 4 mids. You can say its a Tier 3.. but then the same can be said, you are comparing the mega vs geddon. T2 vs T1. The hyperion? It's a sad joke. After these speed changes come through, any short range BS is dead for solo and utterly dead for gangs. Their weapon systems need to be fundamentally changed. I'll make it easier for you to understand. Two situations. 1. Your blaster boat can MWD into range fast and apply its close range DMG. 2. Your blaster boat can no longer MWD into range fast and hence, can't apply any of its point blank DMG. It doesn't even have a viable option in lower dmg higher range ammo to compensate. Now the devs are going to pursue these Battleship speed/acceleration changes so its set, they want slow lumbering BS. What else can you fix besides the weapon systems themselves to suit this new gameplay?
Strill	Posted - 2008.10.24 05:51:00 - [42] Edited by: Strill on 24/10/2008 05:54:47 Fine. I'm gonna say that everyone's analysis has been wrong because looking at any arbitrary point on a graph won't show you what the whole graph looks like. One graph could have the highest effectiveness at one point but be crap everywhere else. To that end I prepared a few graphs of damage vs range for you to compare. Some of them look pretty even, but a lot of them look pretty darn skewed. All graphs are done using max skills, largest T2 guns, and shortest-range T1 ammo. Ship bonuses and target sig radius/traversal is listed. Max Skills, No bonuses +25% damage blaster vs stock pulse laser Blaster Mega vs Pulse Geddon Lyria Skydancer's proposed comparison (Mega vs geddon while shooting a 265 sig 400m/s target) Hyperion vs Apocalypse Hyperion vs Apoc while shooting at Lyria's AB-ing Battlecruiser Megathron vs Apocalypse Megathron vs Apocalypse while shooting at Lyria's AB-ing Battlecruiser All of the graphs in one picture If you'd like another graph I'd be happy to provide one.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.24 05:53:00 - [43] Originally by: Murkon Salesgirl 5. A closer orbit also generates more transversal as a result of CCP's silly maths. It does not favour any weapon system in particular. It favors the weapon with the higher tracking. The question that many people ask is "what is tracking as my optimal" as if they can always fight at their optimal and other pilots will care enough to stick around at their optimal. As if two ships shooting at each other can both be at each other optimal at the same time when they're using different weapon systems. That is not the proper question. The proper question is "what is my tracking at the range at which I am likely to be fighting". Jump in range is about 15km, which means that for an ABing BC, the Abaddon has to run 4km in the opposite direction and the Mega has to run 4km towards the target to hit their optimal hit percentage. The mega, when it gets to 13km can web and then keep at range(or manually fly via "look at/double click") to reduce transversal. The abbaddon has no such respite and is much less agile. That is not to say that against larger targets the advantage does not shift back towards the pulse lasers as tracking is less of an issue and range is more of an issue(though i would be surprised if you could not close from 15km to punish a pulse ship), but it does mean that for the question of who is better off shooting at the target we are dealing with, the AB'ing BC, the answer is unquestionably the blaster ship. Also, the Hyperion has 5 meds, and that means it can fit 2 webs ;) It is also faster and more agile than the Megathron.
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2008.10.24 06:08:00 - [44] Originally by: Strill Edited by: Strill on 24/10/2008 05:57:26 Fine. I'm gonna say that everyone's analysis has been wrong because looking at any arbitrary point on a graph won't show you what the whole graph looks like. One graph could have the highest effectiveness at one point but be crap everywhere else. To that end I prepared a few graphs of damage vs range for you to compare. Some of them look pretty even, but a lot of them look pretty darn skewed. All graphs are done using max skills, largest T2 guns, and shortest-range T1 ammo. Ship bonuses and target sig radius/traversal is listed. Max Skills, No bonuses +25% damage blaster vs stock pulse laser Blaster Mega vs Pulse Geddon Lyria Skydancer's proposed comparison (Mega vs geddon while shooting a 265 sig 400m/s target) Hyperion vs Apocalypse Hyperion vs Apoc while shooting at Lyria's AB-ing Battlecruiser Megathron vs Apocalypse Megathron vs Apocalypse while shooting at Lyria's AB-ing Battlecruiser All of the graphs in one picture If you'd like another graph I'd be happy to provide one. Thank you for the nice graphs. I think my point is clear when looking at them. There is not a huge blaster problem at all. ----------------------------------------- [Video] Tempest of Change
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2008.10.24 06:12:00 - [45] Originally by: Goumindong It favors the weapon with the higher tracking. Thank you! I've tried to explain alot of this but as you can see I'm hanging from the gallows. ----------------------------------------- [Video] Tempest of Change
Strill	Posted - 2008.10.24 06:34:00 - [46] Edited by: Strill on 24/10/2008 06:39:00 Here's some graphs with faction webifiers taken into account. Traversal is 100, sig radius is 100, everything else is the same as I listed in my other post. http://img207.imageshack.us/my.php?image=graphwithwebshc8.png
Strill	Posted - 2008.10.24 06:46:00 - [47] Edited by: Strill on 24/10/2008 06:46:22 Originally by: Goumindong ed: Note, I am not saying there isn't one, but I am saying that I would like you to explain just why its a problem rather than simply stating that it is. The only one where blasters outdid pulse lasers was the mega vs apoc. All the others either did the same damage within a smaller range window or did less damage even at their peak. The Hyperion vs Apoc showed blasters doing especially poorly.
Murkon Salesgirl Amarr	Posted - 2008.10.24 06:48:00 - [48] Do your graphs with Null and Scorch. Cos with these new acceleration and speed, there's no way your blaster mega or hype is going to be getting effective range for antimatter. Now multiply this problem tenfold in a gang situation since before at least your MWD will get you into range quickly.
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:10:00 - [49] Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 24/10/2008 07:12:28 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Gabriel Karade Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 23/10/2008 21:45:34 Why not list some of my calculations that show how exaggerated and faulty all that data is? It's basically propaganda. CCP is not falling for it you know, they can actually do their own calculations and get real and accurate results instead. Show me where it's faulty. There is nothing exaggerated about the live fire test, there is nothing exaggerated about the hit chance plots (they use the formula the game engine uses), there is nothing exaggerated about the flaw in the tracking formula. There is nothing exaggerated about the closing of the DPS gap between Blasters/Torps/Pulses. In short put up or shut up. I'll quote myself from the other thread: "Blaster mega/Pulse geddon (both using t1 short range ammo) Sig rad: 400/400 Optimal: 4500/15000 Fall off: 12500/10000 Tracking: 0.07442/0.04219 Target is a Abing BC 265 sig 400m/s speed Result is: 1. The maximum hit chance occurs at 11.45km range for the blaster and is 57%. 2. The maximum hit chance occurs at 18.36km range for the pulse and is 61% 3. As you can clearly see the max hit chance on a weapon that has high fall off occurs much farther away from its optimal. 4. Now if you look at the graph and apply your faulty logic by comparing the hit chances in respective optimal, ie 4500m for the blaster and 15000m for the pulse, you can obviously see why this gives a totally wrong picture of the blaster performance. 5. Also take into consideration that a BC will have to have a slower transversal in a tighter orbit wich will favor the graph towards the blaster. Wich means approximately that they have the same max performance according to their range and are range_vs_tracking balanced." Another quote on why alot of your graphs and comparisons are faulty: "Don't make a fool out of yourself. Maximum hit chance (wich is what is important) for a certain target with a certain transversal is NOT at optimal. It is somewhere betweem optimal and optimal+fall off. If you have a [insert any gun ship] firing at a [insert any ship] with a certain transversal your hitchance as a function of distance will have a maximum BETWEEN your guns optimal range and optimal+fall off. Why? Because the hit chance reduction past optimal is only slight to begin with, wich means that you benefit more from the reduced angular velocity of your target then you lose tracking by being in fall off. If you do not understand this you should really LOOK at the graphs available in the tracking guide. You obviously STILL are oblivious of tracking mechanics. Read up and then come back. Kthxbai." So, short answer: No you can't have 4 mid megas with almost pulse ranges. One example Lyria, ONE. Where, because of you're absurd target choice, and using best case blaster vs worst case pulse, hit chance happens to be about the around about the same in deep falloff. Stick the Apoc in there and 61% becomes 75%. Do that vs a Battleship (as I did) and you see a different plot all together. We can go round in circles forever; your one example does not 'prove' there is fault with plots based on the base numbers from the flippin database, only that you are good at manufacturing a skewed example to support your argument. P.S you ignored the part on my post about the absurd closing of the DPS gap between Pulses/Torps/Blasters, the glaring hole in the tracking formula, the live fire test vs a zero-fit stabber.
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:12:00 - [50] Originally by: Gabriel Karade One example Lyria, ONE. Where, because of you're absurd target choice, and using best case blaster vs worst case pulse, hit chance happens to be about the around about the same in deep falloff. Stick the Apoc in there and 61% becomes 75%. Do that vs a Battleship (as I did) and you see a different plot all together. We can go round in circles forever; your one example does not 'prove' there is fault with plots based on the base numbers from the flippin database, only that you are good at manufacturing a skewed example to support your argument. Seems the judge agrees with my calculations though oddly enough. Can't that that wrong.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:14:00 - [51] Edited by: Goumindong on 24/10/2008 07:15:25 Originally by: Strill Edited by: Strill on 24/10/2008 06:53:16 Originally by: Goumindong ed: Note, I am not saying there isn't one, but I am saying that I would like you to explain just why its a problem rather than simply stating that it is. The only one where blasters did more peak damage than pulse lasers was the mega vs apoc. In general, all of them either did the same damage within a smaller range window and/or did less damage even at their peak. The Hyperion vs Apoc showed blasters doing especially poorly. Uhh, the graphs you just provided show the exact opposite. Especially since 13km is the range on a t2 web[overloading hoy!] and you don't slow down instantly which means that the webbifying effect doesn't come into effect until you are slightly inside the web. In which case the blasters are pretty well decimating the lasers under about 13km. Which is what is expected. Also, you shouldn't be using an Apoc, but an Abaddon or Geddon. Oh, and you reset your transversal/sig radius back to default, no need for that. Quote: closing of the DPS gap between Pulses/Blasters What? when did this happen?
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:16:00 - [52] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Gabriel Karade One example Lyria, ONE. Where, because of you're absurd target choice, and using best case blaster vs worst case pulse, hit chance happens to be about the around about the same in deep falloff. Stick the Apoc in there and 61% becomes 75%. Do that vs a Battleship (as I did) and you see a different plot all together. We can go round in circles forever; your one example does not 'prove' there is fault with plots based on the base numbers from the flippin database, only that you are good at manufacturing a skewed example to support your argument. What? the guy how doesn't know how many high slots a helios has? Sorry but no, the exact numbers are their in the database for all to see. You didn't answer the second part of my question. Seems the judge agrees with my calculations though oddly enough. Can't that that wrong.
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:20:00 - [53] Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 24/10/2008 07:15:25 Quote: closing of the DPS gap between Pulses/Blasters/torps What? when did this happen? Don't snip posts, it just makes you look like a ****. When they boosted torpedo DPS by 33%, reduced EM resistance and boosted pulse tracking (more real DPS). -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:22:00 - [54] Edited by: Goumindong on 24/10/2008 07:23:19 Edited by: Goumindong on 24/10/2008 07:23:05 Originally by: Gabriel Karade Don't snip posts, it just makes you look like a **. When they boosted torpedo DPS by 33%, reduced EM resistance and boosted pulse tracking (more real DPS). Don't ignore the point, if you want to say that they reduced EM resistance and increased tracking then do so, don't say they increased DPS while looking at graphs that are damage type neutral as your indicator for a problem. Originally by:** Gabriel Karade What? the guy how doesn't know how many high slots a helios has? Sorry but no, the exact numbers are their in the database for all to see. I want to see Nozh/Fendal's comments. You didn't answer the second part of my question. Ahh, personal attacks, what would we ever do without them.
Strill	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:24:00 - [55] Originally by: Murkon Salesgirl Do your graphs with Null and Scorch. Cos with these new acceleration and speed, there's no way your blaster mega or hype is going to be getting effective range for antimatter. Now multiply this problem tenfold in a gang situation since before at least your MWD will get you into range quickly. http://img508.imageshack.us/my.php?image=graphswitht2ammogw0.png If you'd like, here's the spreadsheet I used to calculate this stuff...although I made it in openoffice, so I'm not sure if it'll export to excel ok. http://dl.eve-files.com/media/0810/single-sheet.zip
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:27:00 - [56] Originally by: Strill Originally by: Murkon Salesgirl Do your graphs with Null and Scorch. Cos with these new acceleration and speed, there's no way your blaster mega or hype is going to be getting effective range for antimatter. Now multiply this problem tenfold in a gang situation since before at least your MWD will get you into range quickly. http://img508.imageshack.us/my.php?image=graphswitht2ammogw0.png If you'd like, here's the spreadsheet I used to calculate this stuff...although I made it in openoffice, so I'm not sure if it'll export to excel ok. http://dl.eve-files.com/media/0810/single-sheet.zip You did something wrong, the optimal range on an Apoc with scorch is about 60km with no tracking mods. You're dropping off about 34km, which says to me something is wrong.
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:28:00 - [57] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Gabriel Karade Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 24/10/2008 07:15:25 Quote: closing of the DPS gap between Pulses/Blasters/torps What? when did this happen? Don't snip posts, it just makes you look like a ***. When they boosted torpedo DPS by 33%, reduced EM resistance and boosted pulse tracking (more real DPS). Don't ignore the point, if you want to say that they reduced EM resistance and increased tracking then do so, don't say they increased DPS while looking at graphs that are damage type neutral as your indicator for a problem. Did I mention about making the Apocalypse OTT? But like I said, it's not just Pulses*, Torpedoes do absurd damage compared to Blasters these days. Both Pulse and Torpedoes make blasters a poor choice in a gang role, and if CCP don't want a solo Blaster role where do they fit in? Oh and finally, I'd really really like to see a dev comment on the tracking formula flaw...
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:29:00 - [58] Originally by: Goumindong Ahh, personal attacks, what would we ever do without them. It's a statement of a fact, he got it wrong.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:30:00 - [59] Originally by: Gabriel Karade Did I mention about making the Apocalypse OTT? But like I said, it's not just Pulses, Torpedoes do absurd damage compared to Blasters these days. Both Pulse and Torpedoes make blasters a poor choice in a gang role, and if CCP don't want a solo Blaster role where do they fit in? Oh and finally, I'd really really like to see a dev comment on the tracking formula flaw... Man what? Read that again and tell me it makes a logical argument. I dare you.
Howling Jinn Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch.	Posted - 2008.10.24 07:30:00 - [60] wow some of the people in here is like dc and selim had sex and shat out some babies

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.