EVE Search - New Dev Blog: Sic Itur Ad Astra - Building a New Bridge to the Stars

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: Sic Itur Ad Astra - Building a New Bridge to the Stars

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 47 post(s)
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.26 22:58:00 - [1] Originally by: Letrange Scanner changes... booooooner!!!! One question I have is how the resolution of existing BPOs and inventory is going? The adjustable scan sizes will be totally awesome. Being able to place em anywhere in a system and then warp TO them however I have a question: Could this be used by anyone wishing to establish a deep safespot? If it works that way then yes. So what? If you can tell a probe to warp anywhere then deep space SS become no different than an inline SS.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:08:00 - [2] Originally by: Xennith the easiest solution to the "gaming the system" and using a scout in w space to find w-k paths and get people in k->w is just to get rid of this idea of "every system has a link to k space". just say that if a k-w path is exhausted by mass being moved through it, it becomes unlikely that that system will get a k-w path for the next 2/3 days. 1. Find good system. 2. Intentionally Crash WH 3. Enjoy private playground for 2/3 days.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:13:00 - [3] Originally by: DaemonBarber Originally by: War Fairy Originally by: Letrange Scanner changes... booooooner!!!! One question I have is how the resolution of existing BPOs and inventory is going? The adjustable scan sizes will be totally awesome. Being able to place em anywhere in a system and then warp TO them however I have a question: Could this be used by anyone wishing to establish a deep safespot? If it works that way then yes. So what? If you can tell a probe to warp anywhere then deep space SS become no different than an inline SS. I thought they warped to you, not the other way around... Reading is hard. From the dev blog: Probes can be repositioned in the solar system map using a drag and drop interface and will warp to their specified positions
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.26 23:32:00 - [4] Originally by: Xennith Originally by: War Fairy Originally by: Xennith the easiest solution to the "gaming the system" and using a scout in w space to find w-k paths and get people in k->w is just to get rid of this idea of "every system has a link to k space". just say that if a k-w path is exhausted by mass being moved through it, it becomes unlikely that that system will get a k-w path for the next 2/3 days. 1. Find good system. 2. Intentionally Crash WH 3. Enjoy private playground for 2/3 days. other players can always come in via w-w links, infact if theres always a k-w link, theres no real need to explore deeper than one layer of w space, if theres not always a k-w link, then players are going to need to move around in w space more to find the precious k-w links. this would lead to more people entering your "private" system than if there were a link to it in deepest darkest 0.0. Yes but it's still better. In both cases you have W-W traffic but in the original example you have no K-W. So there's less possible traffic. Thus it's more private than other systems.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 15:56:00 - [5] Originally by: Cailais A W-POS has a very real risk of simply starving to death. C. If all wormholes are 2 way and all systems have a worm hole this is not the case. A hanger array can hold months and months of fuel. Hell an orca can hold almost 2 months of fuel. One freighter trip in to the POS and you're good for months. Sure the freighter might be trapped there for a couple days but you only need to move it once every 3-4 months. It's not an on demand solution but it's still a trivial solution. If you make K-W found through exploration two way but W-K one way that makes the supply problem hard.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 15:59:00 - [6] Originally by: VicturusTeSaluto I'm sure that this will end up as a nerf to piracy in many ways. Probing will clearly be gutted. I fail to see how probes no longer being used up, probes being able to be placed anywhere and stacking of probes is gutting. All of these are clear buffs to the system.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 17:03:00 - [7] Originally by: CCP Greyscale In K-space a collapsing wormhole will respawn elsewhere in the cluster. Forgive me if this is answered already. Can you define cluster please?
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 17:11:00 - [8] Originally by: An Anarchyyt Originally by: War Fairy Originally by: CCP Greyscale In K-space a collapsing wormhole will respawn elsewhere in the cluster. Forgive me if this is answered already. Can you define cluster please? New Eden has always been referred to as a "cluster", in terms of backstory and all that. Thanks for the answer but . . . What does he mean by cluster? Does he mean the same thing as you or the person who wrote the back story? Cluster of systems on one sub server? Constellation? Respawn anywhere?
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 17:14:00 - [9] Originally by: An Anarchyyt You can still use the directional scanner. That assumes no change. Has this been documented? Hey CCP? Can we still use the d scanner to find out if people are trying to probe us?
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 17:16:00 - [10] Originally by: Rex Lashar Cluster = the whole EVE map. Thanks for the guesses but I don't like to make assumptions on patches. That is the path to FAIL. Can we get clarification on where wormholes respawn please? Does in the cluster mean anywhere?
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 17:17:00 - [11] Originally by: An Anarchyyt Originally by: War Fairy Originally by: An Anarchyyt You can still use the directional scanner. That assumes no change. Has this been documented? Hey CCP? Can we still use the d scanner to find out if people are trying to probe us? I guess we'd have to wait for the scanning blog. But so far all scanning has only talked about probes. So no news to directional scanning or to moon scanning makes it sound like it is staying basically the same, so far. They haven't said anything about T3 yet. Guess there won't be any changes to that. :)
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 18:53:00 - [12] Originally by: Cailais If it's easy for you to resupply a POS in W-Space, its just as easy for the opportunist pirate to 'interdict' that resupply. W-Systems act as a great 'long range roamer' for the pirate. I hop my fleet into one and use it to short cut to another system. I can hide my pirate fleet in one. I just dont think refueling that POS is going to be quite as trivial as some people think. You're wrong. It's assymetrical. To refuel you only have to get one ship through. To interdict you have to prevent all ships from getting through. You also seem to be making the assumption that there will be no guards or scouts on the refuel ship to deal with said interdiction. With that you're chance of random pirates is null. If you're going to mess with a POS you shoot it you don't blockade it. Please see current SOP.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 20:45:00 - [13] Originally by: Darkdood I think you totally missed the point. Pie's don't have to do jack to blockade a pos or attack it. What if for an entire month every wormhole into your POS system leads to deep 0.0 space owned and gate camped by your arch enemy. A fictional example that can't happen. Any non-0.0 WH makes refueling trivial. remember if you don't like the wormhole you have you can get a new one at will. Quote: Now flip that around lets say someone does something REALLY super stupid... Meaningless arguement. You can't prevent stupidity. What happens if someone offlines their high sec POS? By your logic refueling high sec POSes is hard becuase someone might be stupid and jet the fuel.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 20:51:00 - [14] Originally by: War Fairy remember if you don't like the wormhole you have you can get a new one at will. The more I think on it the more this seems like the root of the problem. The solution eludes me. Limiting trips by one person would require you to have many people to crash the WH. But that just stops the small groups.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 22:28:00 - [15] Originally by: Destination SkillQueue Ignoring the fact that it's seems like a horribly blunt solution and you would have a hard time justifying it. Building a structure in space will somehow change the very nature of space around it within an entire solarsystem? You're complaining about realism in a far future space ship game? You have no trouble with faster than light travel, clones, the fact that no one can write down a permenent set of instructions to make a jump freighter, but you draw the line at a giant force field ******* with a wormhole? Design the system then write the fiction around it. Never the other way around. Otherwise I completely agree with you. It just makes that section more private. Harder to take down the POS.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.27 22:30:00 - [16] Ok I'm going to open the can of worms. What's wrong with no moon minerals? What's wrong with no POSes? Simple easy solutions.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 11:30:00 - [17] Originally by: rubico1337 nothing inherently bad with POSs, im all for it if they are small and controlled by small corps that dont try to OWN the space, the challenge is letting there be POSes AND making sure any alliance cant lock down several systems. its a balancing act. No that's not a balancing act. That's mutualy exclusive conditions.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 11:45:00 - [18] Originally by: Clansworth Originally by: Exus Question : How will works the security status hits while killing rats in the belts in wormland ? No word yet on WHO the rats will be. If they are of the existing pirate factions (unlikely), then I would expect similar security status affects. If they are unknowns, with little/no CONCORD relations, I would expect little/no sec status effects. Who says the angels can't use wormholes?
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 12:00:00 - [19] Originally by: Ahro Thariori Why is it, that in everyones thought process only the defenders can game the WH mechanics - and the attackers cant? You want a sizeable BS fleet in that WH space? Just rapidly cycle the Whs. Aysmetrical. The defenders only have to get one or two ships in and out to sell and resupply. The attackers have to get how many BSes in to take out a POS? High sec WH won't have enough mass to move a capital so that means at most 4 BSes. Then your fleet is flying how many jumps to the next WH? How big is that one going to be? Also unless you have a cruiser, BC, and a BS as part of your crash team you run the risk of having a ship caught in K-space after the WH crash. The defenders can easilly keep 1 of each at the POS. tl;dr WH have limited mass. This effects attackers more than defenders since they need to move more mass than defenders.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 15:28:00 - [20] Originally by: Aleia Destrava 1. How to determine if you're actually closer to K-Space, and as such a step in the right direction? Maybe through careful mapping with bookmarks and empirical study this may be determined but certainly in the beginning months will complicate matters considerably. Impossible. WHs are random.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 15:48:00 - [21] Been thinking a lot about this over the last couple days. All of this is with the info we've been given up to this point. Permanent POSes will happen. 3 accounts and you can do it. More makes it easier. 2 is doable but very risky. It will be boring and time intensive but not hard as long as you plan and bring the right supplies. Especially with the smaller POSes. For the right moon it would be well well worth it. We will see alliance colonizing systems. We will also see small corps doing it. We will not see colonization of large areas. There really aren't large areas. Especially if there are moon minerals in the traditional manner. The high end ones are just too ******* lucrative. I don't ever see POSes becoming common though. Great feature on the whole CCP. The single best addition to the game. The random pathing aspect of WHs is a great equalizer. W-space is the only viable blob killer proposed so far. If you make it delayed local. If the rumors about warping rats and the need to fit a point are true. If that's the case it's going to be a great no blob cat and mouse PvP area. With T3 as loot. Please post those dev blogs CCP. Until then.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 15:51:00 - [22] Originally by: An Anarchyyt Is there any change you can mention what kind of systems will be mandated to have at least one wormhole open? I don't understand CCP's odd phrasing. Anyways this has already been covered in this thread. K-space systems may have a WH. W-space systems must have a WH.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 16:17:00 - [23] Edited by: War Fairy on 28/01/2009 16:20:34 sigh I'm not going to go back and find it. I'll just clarify. This is the simplest I can summarize it. K-space systems may have a WH. K-space WHs lead only to W-space. W-space systems must have a WH. W-space WHs lead to either W-space or K-space.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 16:24:00 - [24] Originally by: Khanto Thor I imagine you could do this, but because there is 2500 systems which the wormhole you found could go to, it may take a very long time before you finally find a wormhole back to your POS. How many scans would that take?, it probably would not be worth the time and effort and you could make more isk ratting! You're doing it wrong. You scan from W-space. If the W-K goes to high sec or low sec you're good. Doesn't need to be anywhere specific that way.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 16:27:00 - [25] Edited by: War Fairy on 28/01/2009 16:27:51 Originally by: An Anarchyyt Originally by: War Fairy sigh I'm not going to go back and find it. I'll just clarify. K-space systems may have a WH. K-space WHs only lead to W-space. W-space systems must have a WH. W-space WHs can lead to either W-space or K-space. Yes, and then he said something that goes against that. And as well it was mentioned that K-K wormholes are possible too. I think what was said was K-W-K pathing or that the tech could handle K-K WHs but they weren't in the design at this time. I'll have to check that when I have time. What did Prism say to contradict? Edit: I just reread his post and I don't see what contradicts mine. Can you share please?
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 16:55:00 - [26] Originally by: An Anarchyyt There is no guarantee that W-space MUST have this connection. What does "this" reference? You're using a pronoun without first using a noun. Greyscale says in post 713 that all w-space systems must contain a WH. Please show me where Prism contradicts this. "There'll always be a wormhole leading somewhere, somewhere in the system." CCP Greyscale in refernce to W-space systems in http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=982776&page=24#713
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 16:59:00 - [27] Edited by: War Fairy on 28/01/2009 17:03:17 Edit: Someone beat me to it. points up What they said.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 17:08:00 - [28] Originally by: An Anarchyyt Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 28/01/2009 17:02:34 Originally by: Granmethedon III You missed off the important part (highlighted in red) that shows that both Prism and Greyscale agree the W-space MUST always have a wormhole in it. ;) No he didn't miss anything. Because you are doing nothing but speculating that that is what Prism meant. Where in his post does he qualify what he is referring to? Logic is hard. Greyscale says that w-space systems must have a worm hole. Prism says unless a system must have a worm hole (w-space) that the system may not contain one. These are complementary not contradicting.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 17:10:00 - [29] Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab Originally by: Granmethedon III ... Originally by: CCP Prism X Originally by: Khanto Thor How many open wormholes can there be in a wormhole system? With the exception of systems that are forced to have at least one wormhole inside of them, a given system could theoretically have all the existing wormholes within it. The latter depends on whether there are any other wormholes there or not. Collapsing the wormhole you already have will not guarantee a new wormhole spawning in your current system, unless your system is one of those previously mentioned systems that are forced to have at least 1 wormhole in them at any given moment. ... You missed off the important part (highlighted in red) that shows that both Prism and Greyscale agree the W-space MUST always have a wormhole in it. ;) No, CCP PrismX is actually saying that there are two classes of wormspace systems. Those that _MUST_ have at least one wormhole, and those that might have zero or more. Right and the class that must have one is w-space. It's not that hard people. At this point I'm just going to assume I fell for a goon troll and plonk any further posts.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 17:21:00 - [30] Originally by: JimBob Leeroy i am guessing here, but it appears that they are modified there mech.s not confused. they stated that nothing is totally set yet, and they are smart enough to listen to ppl in here. to try and work out many of the bugs before they even drop it on sisi. was stated at least 2 times that k>k wh's would exist, the trade routs in early post, to clearifie later.but at that time they said all Wspace would have a W>K WH, now after all the talk it would seam they have seen a need to make logistics of a PoS on some moons harder.so there are to be some systems that will not have a WH all the time, let alone one that goes to K space. i know many don't read the entire posts, because with all the repeate and guesses(like this one), it becomes a daunting task. and for this reason i normaly stay away from these. but got to say ccp has me more hyped about an expansion than i have in over 6 yrs of morpg'ing. The trade routes mentioned earlier specifically mention K-W-K.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 17:22:00 - [31] Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab Originally by: CCP Prism X Originally by: Khanto Thor CCP...a couple of questions: How many open wormholes can there be in a wormhole system? In wormhole space, if the next wormhole found is to restrictive to let your gang of ships through, can you keep scanning for wormholes, until one matches the mass of your ships? or does the open wormhole have to collapse before any new wormholes can be discovered? With the exception of systems that are forced to have at least one wormhole inside of them, a given system could theoretically have all the existing wormholes within it. The latter depends on whether there are any other wormholes there or not. Collapsing the wormhole you already have will not guarantee a new wormhole spawning in your current system, unless your system is one of those previously mentioned systems that are forced to have at least 1 wormhole in them at any given moment. It's really not as nice and comfy over there as some of the proponents of Alliances claiming everything with POSs would like you to think. I'm quite looking forward to following to seeing these plans unfold upon launch. P.S. You got an expansion that starts with a Q! Now you want systems as well! Please read the post again carefully, and consider the context here... First, he's answering a question about wormholes in wormhole systems. Second, the bolded parts of the answer does not make sense if he's talking about both k- and w-space systems. Anything before the unless is meaningless as w-space systems meet the criteria after the unless.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 17:33:00 - [32] Edited by: War Fairy on 28/01/2009 17:34:52 EDIT: Too slow again. Redundant post deleted.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 17:46:00 - [33] Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab Originally by: War Fairy Anything before the unless is meaningless as w-space systems meet the criteria after the unless. It is the action of collapsing and hoping for a new wormhole to appear that is not applicable to w-space. It would be if you were looking for better w-space systems and hoping to keep your exploration to one system, but we haven't really even touched that possibility yet. Anyway, the god himself answered above. That's just wrong. Learn what unless means. The action of collapising and hoping for a new one applies to systems that don't have to have a worm hole. That's k-space.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 17:53:00 - [34] Originally by: Xailia Edited by: Xailia on 28/01/2009 17:50:43 Originally by: CCP Prism X Time flies like an arrow! (If you got that you're pretty spiffy!) My bad, the quote strictly references wormhole space systems and I totally violated the contextual scope. I was referring to any given system, not strictly just wormhole space. However, I would argue that the definition does not change the possible meaning of my post, just removes the ambiguity. I never expressed any need for systems with no wormholes in them like I expressed the need for the other (Excuses, excuses, excuses! Thank god for that unless..). At any rate: As it stands the in-out trick will do you a lot of good to dictate connections from W-K and I, for one, dislike that. I am however known to be difficult to the point of malice so you don't need to worry just yet. The team does recognize the issue at hand and is contemplating whether it should be addressed and if so, how. It should be expressed again, as Whisper commented on, that the nature of SCRUM is such that nothing here is set in stone. I know all developers say this during these kinds of discussions but SCRUM is made for that. So, things might change.. that's the point of getting the feedback from you guys (although I also like the "OOohh"s and "AAAaaah"s). So to clarify: W-systems have 1-n wormholes active. K-systems have 0-n wormholes active. Certain K-systems have 1-n wormholes active. Correct? and "Some W-systems can have 0 wormholes active" is under consideration? It's exactly what I said earlier. K-space systems may have a WH. K-space WHs only lead to W-space. W-space systems must have a WH. W-space WHs can lead to either W-space or K-space.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 18:08:00 - [35] Originally by: Raymon James force the wormhole to move around and force any wanabe Wormhole tunnel diggers to at least work for a liveing to get it back to "there" space But you don't need to get to "their" space. Any Empire system will work.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 18:21:00 - [36] Originally by: Xailia Originally by: War Fairy K-space WHs only lead to W-space. Prism X has left that as a possibility though: Originally by: CCP Prism X I just said there would be a possibility K<->K connections. I emphasize possibility to ensure that people don't expect that to be the norm. He's difficult to the point of malice. He's qualifying it verbally and with emoticon. The tech handles it. Nothing more. He's also said they could possibly be one way. He's also said they could possible have a fixed one that throws you anywhere. My summary is based specifically mentioned items. If there's a concrete statement about K-K WHs please provide it.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 18:23:00 - [37] Edited by: War Fairy on 28/01/2009 18:24:21 Originally by: Arthur Rage Edited by: Arthur Rage on 28/01/2009 18:15:21 Originally by: Shinma Apollo Wormholes: Will they operate like stargates so they can be bubbled as such? Cloaking: PLEASE remove cloaking as a viable strategy for wormholes, otherwise wormhole systems can be easily distinguished by, "Oh I'm in wmlmmkmk system, right next to asdfffass system" Wormhole camping, oh noes, Stargate camping is lame enough. Cloaks, any reason why they should not work ? The distinguishing part you mentioned somehow doesn't make sense. Forced Closing : 30sec timer or 100km traval distance, not exactly alot. even if this makes closing 30 minutes longer that'll be still way too fast. My idea - When going through a WH the Ship is affected in a way that it can't go back immiadetly, it is "energized" and gets pushed away like two magnets with the same load whey trying to approach. The bigger the ship the longer it takes for the effectt to dissappear - like 5mins for Shuttles, 15mins for Frigates ... This effect also messes up Sensors and makes locking on the newly arrived ship extremely difficult (impossible for a short while ?). Wormhole camping : nope. (except Smartbombs and so on) Forced closing within a very short time : nope. Reasonable explaination for mechanic : yes. This only stops small groups. Large groups of players can throw people at the problem to negate the game mechanic. Due to the random nature I think worm hole camping will be staring at empty space. You're better off roving.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 19:48:00 - [38] Originally by: Xailia Originally by: War Fairy K-space WHs only lead to W-space. Prism X has left that as a possibility though: Originally by: CCP Prism X I just said there would be a possibility K<->K connections. I emphasize possibility to ensure that people don't expect that to be the norm. Thinking on this a bit. Yeah there could be rare K-K wormholes. Maybe at launch maybe in the future. We don't have enough info.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 19:49:00 - [39] Originally by: Thebro Nobrunder you could also make wormholes become unstable if too many ins and outs happened within a given amount of time. When this happened the current ship traveling through the wormhole is destroyed! This makes it easier to crash WHs. Go really fast with a shuttle.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 19:50:00 - [40] Originally by: JimBob Leeroy Originally by: CCP Prism X Originally by: Ceist Mashal Excited for this! My question is if the W-spaces will have WH(wormhole) entrances from to seperate sovereignties? For instance; an entrance in amarr space and an entrance in gallente space leading to the same W-space. That is totally possible. You could even get that exact effect without any entry into wormhole space! And that is in no way bound to empire2empire type of connections, just more likely than empire2nullsec for example. Thank you. So noted.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 19:56:00 - [41] Originally by: Raymon James 1) the Average wormhole would only fit an orca (meaning half the time it would not fit) What numbers are you using? An orca is 250,000,000 kg. A rokh is 105,300,00 kg. If the "average" worm hole is 2 battleships then so much for exploring with friends. It sounds like you're low-balling. Quote: it takes an average of just under 6 hours a day to get a given wormhole to link back to the Forge with a wormhole big enough to allow an orca Why are you limiting it to The Forge? It's much quicker to get out anywhere in Empire and then fly to The Forge.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.28 19:57:00 - [42] Originally by: Shushan Kadesh An important question - will you be allowing trail accounts to access the wormholes? If so, it really eliminates the risk since if I find a hole, I can just make a trial account and send it through to peek on the other side - and if in a wormhole system with a trail account, I can just pop the noob through all the exit holes I find until I find one leading back to highsec or to my desired 0.0 region without worrying about running into enemy space. THIS!
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.29 16:18:00 - [43] Originally by: Sigras how about this idea for fixing the in out workaround: if a WH collapses because it ran out of mass, the system runs a check; If the WH appeared less than X hours ago, no other WH appears in the system until X hours has passed. This would allow people the peace of mind of knowing they're not going to be stuck in a system for days on end, but at the same time, since nobody really knows what X is, this would severely hamper efforts to in out span the WH to get a respawn Off the top of my head: This allows you to create private systems. This allows you to grief people.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.29 16:29:00 - [44] Originally by: Red 7 You're missing an important consideration about W-Space and Tech 3. If the moons in W-Space provide materials required for Tech 3 production (a likely assumption based on existing Tech 2) That's not a likely assumption if you've read the dev blog or this thread.
War Fairy	Posted - 2009.01.29 16:32:00 - [45] Originally by: Jmanis Catharg Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 29/01/2009 13:36:02 While I'll remain to be corrected, I think people are vastly over-estimating their ability to quickly 'cycle wormholes' tbh. That's fine. You don't need to cycle them quickly. You only need one WH to Empire every month or so.

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.