DUST Search - The Facts: Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP & Changes to Projectile Dam...

All Channels

General Discussions

The Facts: Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP & Changes to Projectile Dam...

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3039	Posted - 2014.09.03 20:55:00 - [1] - Quote There has been a lot of debate and general freaking out/praising the potential changes to the Projectile Damage Profile, specifically in how it will affect Sentinels and the HMG. I wanted to find out for myself exactly how the recent changes to the Sentinels as well as the upcoming change Projectiles will change things, so I did all the maths! I'm not pushing any particular opinion, this is a purely factual exercise. If you feel I've made a mistake in my calculations please let me know so I can make corrections. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MqjNBElFU7Momo_meC-e0LT0SqUtkiv3zwACv3hdmBQ/edit?usp=sharing In a Full Hybrid Brick Tanked fit, the Amarr Sentinel will outclass every suit in all damage profiles except 2. In those two it is behind the Gallente by a small margin. In a Full Hybrid Brick Tanked fit, the Minmatar Sentinel will have the lowest eHP for all damage profiles except 1, in which is is about 170 eHP more than the Caldari Sentinel. Even in the most extreme Projectile profile, (-20/+20) the Amarr Sentinel has roughly 150 effective Armor HP more than the Caldari's effective Shield HP. In a full Armor Tank with no shield mods, the Amarr Sentinel has more eHP than a Caldari Sentinel with no armor mods and full Shield Tank in a -20/+20 projectile situation. Less extreme profiles widen this gap. Caldari Sentinels rarely stack 4 Complex Shield Extenders, so listed shield HP values will typically be lower than listed. While Shield Sentinels are capable of high shield recharge rates, remember that their shield HP will suffer in order to obtain that recharge I could list out a billion more conditional statements here, but my lunch hour is about over so I'll let you look at the spreadsheet and draw your own conclusions
Vitharr Foebane Terminal Courtesy Proficiency V. 1879	Posted - 2014.09.03 21:01:00 - [2] - Quote I expect that they will go with +/- 15 route and as a lvl 5 Am Sent not worried in the slightest Amarr: Assault V, Scout V, Sentinel V, Commando V, Logistics IV I place my faith in my God, my Empress, and my Laz0r
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3039	Posted - 2014.09.03 21:05:00 - [3] - Quote Vitharr Foebane wrote: I expect that they will go with +/- 15 route and as a lvl 5 Am Sent not worried in the slightest That's probably a fair assessment. I think something that a lot of people forget is that even armor suits have shield HP, which means an increase to that shield resistance is going to buff your overall eHP by a portion, even if the armor eHP goes down at the same time. This makes changes less pronounced than a lot of people typically envision.
Kin Cat Another Clone in the Wall 24	Posted - 2014.09.04 20:16:00 - [4] - Quote "a lot of debate" no, it's been very one-sided
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3055	Posted - 2014.09.04 20:25:00 - [5] - Quote Kin Cat wrote: "a lot of debate" no, it's been very one-sided Well regardless you can look at the numbers if you like and form your own conclusions. I've just personally heard a lot of debate back and forth for both sides, hence the "A lot of debate" line. Like I said I'm not pushing any particular viewpoint, just assembling the facts so people can come to an educated conclusion. Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP Calcs
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 590	Posted - 2014.09.04 20:32:00 - [6] - Quote I don't understand why so many people are freaking out about this. As you have shown the armor tanks will still win out in most cases against shield tanks. And hey there is always a flux grenade. I would think more people would be on board with this, as it will correct the issue of smgs and CRs outperforming weapons that they really shouldn't simply because they have the most negligible damage profile that somehow came out with a net positive (still don't understand what the old devs were thinking on that.)
Michael Arck 5389	Posted - 2014.09.04 21:15:00 - [7] - Quote Math and theory is one thing. On field execution is something entirely different. Archistrategos *Where the fear has gone there will be nothing....only I will remain*
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 591	Posted - 2014.09.04 21:22:00 - [8] - Quote Michael Arck wrote: Math and theory is one thing. On field execution is something entirely different. That's a pretty easy cop out. The major hmg heavy concern has come from hmg vs. hmg. In that case, the only real factors are the two players skills and the MATH AND THEORY behind their stats. You can't balance according to player skill so that leaves only one reasonable point of balance. And the math shows that armor tanks still win the e/hp race in hmg vs. hmg. The sky isn't actually falling chicken little. And like I said already, the damage profile rebalance will help to make smgs and CRs less optimal in situations they were supposed to be less optimal in IE shield tanks. Right now they chew through everything. What bothers me more is this hysteria is distracting from the heavy handed vehicle nerfs. The speeding up of PLC and swarm is all that is really needed. Also nerfing afterburners/injectors is swinging the pendulum even further to where no one in their right mind will fly an ADS or run a Madrugar.
Michael Arck 5389	Posted - 2014.09.04 21:28:00 - [9] - Quote Its really not. All the variables cannot be seen. Thats why math says one thing but.in lab tests demonstrates something else. Archistrategos *Where the fear has gone there will be nothing....only I will remain*
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3056	Posted - 2014.09.04 21:37:00 - [10] - Quote Michael Arck wrote: Its really not. All the variables cannot be seen. Thats why math says one thing but.in lab tests demonstrates something else. That is true, but it's also impossible to calculate all of that without breaking the spreadsheet and my sanity O_O I think what I'm personally taking away from this is "The effect of the change is less extreme than I initially thought it would be, so at this point it's best to just let it happen, see how it works out, and go from there." Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP Calcs

TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 594	Posted - 2014.09.04 21:54:00 - [11] - Quote Michael Arck wrote: Its really not. All the variables cannot be seen. Thats why math says one thing but.in lab tests demonstrates something else. In programming, that's called bugs. Programming is not the same as laboratory tests. In a virtual environment that doesn't adhere to any unknown/unaware conditions the math is all that we need to go on. You shouldn't balance a game on bugs you should fix the bugs, your point is still a cop out and moot. If you do feel so strongly that the math can't be trusted you at least need to present a real reason why instead of a hypothetical stance that something else could happen like a tank could fall out of the sky crushing the amarr tanker.
Funkmaster Whale Seituoda Taskforce Command 2393	Posted - 2014.09.04 21:55:00 - [12] - Quote One thing I think people are failing to account is the Proficiency bonus on projectile weapons offering another 15% to armor. At the current profile with Prof. V you get 126.5% efficiency vs armor while at the proposed 15% you would get 132.2% efficiency. It's not huge but it does end up being roughly a 6% buff to armor damage with a 10% nerf to shield. If anything I think it'll be a buff to weapons like the CR since shields are never really above 300-400 for most players while they typically have a lot more armor. Follow me on Twitch.tv!
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3057	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:00:00 - [13] - Quote Funkmaster Whale wrote: One thing I think people are failing to account is the Proficiency bonus on projectile weapons offering another 15% to armor. At the current profile with Prof. V you get 126.5% efficiency vs armor while at the proposed 15% you would get 132.2% efficiency. It's not huge but it does end up being roughly a 6% buff to armor damage with a 10% nerf to shield. If anything I think it'll be a buff to weapons like the CR since shields are never really above 300-400 for most players while they typically have a lot more armor. IMO it should be - / + 5% as that would actually nerf armor damage by roughly 6% while shield would remain the same. Well now I kinda feel embarrased for not taking proficiency into account. I'll have to update that later tonight. Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP Calcs
Michael Arck 5394	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:08:00 - [14] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Michael Arck wrote: Its really not. All the variables cannot be seen. Thats why math says one thing but.in lab tests demonstrates something else. In programming, that's called bugs. Programming is not the same as laboratory tests. In a virtual environment that doesn't adhere to any unknown/unaware conditions the math is all that we need to go on. You shouldn't balance a game on bugs you should fix the bugs, your point is still a cop out and moot. If you do feel so strongly that the math can't be trusted you at least need to present a real reason why instead of a hypothetical stance that something else could happen like a tank could fall out of the sky crushing the amarr tanker. This is why I referenced chicken little. That is a children's story specifically about people fearing the unknown and making a big deal out of it against evidence to the contrary. Again, what am I talking about is unforeseen variables that can only be identified througb testing. Simple. Archistrategos *Where the fear has gone there will be nothing....only I will remain*
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 596	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:19:00 - [15] - Quote Michael Arck wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Michael Arck wrote: Its really not. All the variables cannot be seen. Thats why math says one thing but.in lab tests demonstrates something else. In programming, that's called bugs. Programming is not the same as laboratory tests. In a virtual environment that doesn't adhere to any unknown/unaware conditions the math is all that we need to go on. You shouldn't balance a game on bugs you should fix the bugs, your point is still a cop out and moot. If you do feel so strongly that the math can't be trusted you at least need to present a real reason why instead of a hypothetical stance that something else could happen like a tank could fall out of the sky crushing the amarr tanker. This is why I referenced chicken little. That is a children's story specifically about people fearing the unknown and making a big deal out of it against evidence to the contrary. Again, what am I talking about is unforeseen variables that can only be identified througb testing. Simple. Well, I guess we will test it and see come Delta. Until then, there is no reason for it to be removed from Delta as the math is solid and it will correct the OP nature of the CR and SMG. I run Caldari and Minmitar with shield as my general focus and right now projectile weapons chew me up with their absurd damage profile which, in my opinion, is a point of imbalance.
Michael Arck 5395	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:22:00 - [16] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Michael Arck wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Michael Arck wrote: Its really not. All the variables cannot be seen. Thats why math says one thing but.in lab tests demonstrates something else. In programming, that's called bugs. Programming is not the same as laboratory tests. In a virtual environment that doesn't adhere to any unknown/unaware conditions the math is all that we need to go on. You shouldn't balance a game on bugs you should fix the bugs, your point is still a cop out and moot. If you do feel so strongly that the math can't be trusted you at least need to present a real reason why instead of a hypothetical stance that something else could happen like a tank could fall out of the sky crushing the amarr tanker. This is why I referenced chicken little. That is a children's story specifically about people fearing the unknown and making a big deal out of it against evidence to the contrary. Again, what am I talking about is unforeseen variables that can only be identified througb testing. Simple. Well, I guess we will test it and see come Delta. Until then, there is no reason for it to be removed from Delta as the math is solid and it will correct the OP nature of the CR and SMG. I run Caldari and minmitar with shield as my general focus and right now projectile weapons chew me up with their absurd damage profile which, in my opinion, is a point of imbalance. Lol but the math created what they are today! As you say, we shall see. Its going to be interesting. Archistrategos *Where the fear has gone there will be nothing....only I will remain*
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3058	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:26:00 - [17] - Quote Assuming I didn't **** up the math, check out the Amarr's total Hybrid eHP for the projectile profiles. -5/10 is the same as -20/20 at 1800eHP. Looks like the increase in shield resistance compensates for the loss in armor? Overall the Amarr largely remains unchanged, whereas its pretty much a straight buff for the Caldari and Minmatar. Interesting stuff. Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP Calcs
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 596	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:29:00 - [18] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Assuming I didn't **** up the math, check out the Amarr's total Hybrid eHP for the projectile profiles. -5/10 is the same as -20/20 at 1800eHP. Looks like the increase in shield resistance compensates for the loss in armor? Overall the Amarr largely remains unchanged, whereas its pretty much a straight buff for the Caldari and Minmatar. Interesting stuff. Which again for a weapon that's not supposed to be effective against shields seems logical. My biggest issue is that it has more than 200% damage buff when split currently unlike all other damage profiles that balance out at 200%. If the issue is the fact that explosives are -20/20 for varieties sake I see nothing wrong with -15/15. -5/5 and 0/0 are imbalanced by nature though making projectiles the best all around weapons against any form of tank.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3059	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:32:00 - [19] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Assuming I didn't **** up the math, check out the Amarr's total Hybrid eHP for the projectile profiles. -5/10 is the same as -20/20 at 1800eHP. Looks like the increase in shield resistance compensates for the loss in armor? Overall the Amarr largely remains unchanged, whereas its pretty much a straight buff for the Caldari and Minmatar. Interesting stuff. Which again for a weapon that's not supposed to be effective against shields seems logical. My biggest issue is that it has more than 200% damage buff when split currently unlike all other damage profiles that balance out at 200%. are you referring to the -5/+10 profile it currently has? Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP Calcs
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 596	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:36:00 - [20] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Assuming I didn't **** up the math, check out the Amarr's total Hybrid eHP for the projectile profiles. -5/10 is the same as -20/20 at 1800eHP. Looks like the increase in shield resistance compensates for the loss in armor? Overall the Amarr largely remains unchanged, whereas its pretty much a straight buff for the Caldari and Minmatar. Interesting stuff. Which again for a weapon that's not supposed to be effective against shields seems logical. My biggest issue is that it has more than 200% damage buff when split currently unlike all other damage profiles that balance out at 200%. are you referring to the -5/+10 profile it currently has? Yes. Currently that adds up to 205% instead of 200% like all other damage profiles.

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3061	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:37:00 - [21] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Yes. Currently that adds up to 205% instead of 200% like all other damage profiles. I mean rail tech is -10/10.... Oh, well yeah. I think you would be hard pressed to find someone who didn't feel that needed to be changed to a more symmetrical profile. The question is more should it be -5/+5, -10/+10, -15/+15, or -20/+20. Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP Calcs
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 596	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:39:00 - [22] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Yes. Currently that adds up to 205% instead of 200% like all other damage profiles. I mean rail tech is -10/10.... Oh, well yeah. I think you would be hard pressed to find someone who didn't feel that needed to be changed to a more symmetrical profile. The question is more should it be -5/+5, -10/+10, -15/+15, or -20/+20. And I think either -20/20 to match the amarr counter balance of 20/-20 or -15/15 to make it a unique profile. -5/5 is too close to making it the all purpose weapon good against all tanks. Remember, this doesn't only impact hmgs, this will also bring smgs and CRs down in dps to be more balanced with their counterparts. Remember most smart players don't dual tank all suits and play to the strengths of their suits. This means Caldari will be more resistant to a projectile weapon than Gallente while at the same time amarr tech do the opposite. I hear people complain about rail rifles a lot but if you aren't Amarr or Gallente laser rifles are far more deadly, all weapon profiles should be balanced around this concept of give and take between shield and armor tanking.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3061	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:41:00 - [23] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Yes. Currently that adds up to 205% instead of 200% like all other damage profiles. I mean rail tech is -10/10.... Oh, well yeah. I think you would be hard pressed to find someone who didn't feel that needed to be changed to a more symmetrical profile. The question is more should it be -5/+5, -10/+10, -15/+15, or -20/+20. And I think either -20/20 to match the amarr counter balance of 20/-20 or -15/+15 to make it a unique profile. -5/5 is too close to making it the all purpose weapon good against all tanks. Going purely off the numbers, the 15% one feels the most proper to me, but that's just my opinion. Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP Calcs
TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 596	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:43:00 - [24] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Yes. Currently that adds up to 205% instead of 200% like all other damage profiles. I mean rail tech is -10/10.... Oh, well yeah. I think you would be hard pressed to find someone who didn't feel that needed to be changed to a more symmetrical profile. The question is more should it be -5/+5, -10/+10, -15/+15, or -20/+20. And I think either -20/20 to match the amarr counter balance of 20/-20 or -15/+15 to make it a unique profile. -5/5 is too close to making it the all purpose weapon good against all tanks. Going purely off the numbers, the 15% one feels the most proper to me, but that's just my opinion. Since explosives are -20/20 I tend to agree.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3061	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:47:00 - [25] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Yes. Currently that adds up to 205% instead of 200% like all other damage profiles. I mean rail tech is -10/10.... Oh, well yeah. I think you would be hard pressed to find someone who didn't feel that needed to be changed to a more symmetrical profile. The question is more should it be -5/+5, -10/+10, -15/+15, or -20/+20. And I think either -20/20 to match the amarr counter balance of 20/-20 or -15/+15 to make it a unique profile. -5/5 is too close to making it the all purpose weapon good against all tanks. Going purely off the numbers, the 15% one feels the most proper to me, but that's just my opinion. Since explosives are -20/20 I tend to agree. At the same time, Direct Explosive damage is pretty rare, meaning that all sentinels will resist 25% of most explosive damage dealt (since it'll be splash). a -20/+20 to Projectiles would offer a direct counter to the +20/-20 of the Laser weapons, since the damage would be direct and not subject to the splash reduction. So that's food for thought. Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP Calcs
LEHON Xeon Ahrendee Mercenaries 690	Posted - 2014.09.04 22:57:00 - [26] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: I don't understand why so many people are freaking out about this. As you have shown the armor tanks will still win out in most cases against shield tanks. And hey there is always a flux grenade. I would think more people would be on board with this, as it will correct the issue of smgs and CRs outperforming weapons that they really shouldn't simply because they have the most negligible damage profile that somehow came out with a net positive (still don't understand what the old devs were thinking on that.) What concerns me so highly is that it makes the CR almost ineffectual at longer ranges against dual tanked or shield based suits. I don't think that it should have an imbalance of 5/10, but 20/20 is ridiculous. CR is supposed to be a mid-longer range weapon. At longer ranges, I know full well it is going to go the way of the AR against shield and dual tank suits. It will no longer be able to engage those types at longer ranges as people will simply be able to get to cover before you can even get into the armor reserves. People can say what they want about ScR with the -20 to armor. They still eat through armor because of the extremely high initial damage. I will begrudgingly accept 15/15, but I would rather have it 10/10. Why am I still here yet?
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3061	Posted - 2014.09.04 23:08:00 - [27] - Quote LEHON Xeon wrote: What concerns me so highly is that it makes the CR almost ineffectual at longer ranges against dual tanked or shield based suits. I don't think that it should have an imbalance of 5/10, but 20/20 is ridiculous. CR is supposed to be a mid-longer range weapon. At longer ranges, I know full well it is going to go the way of the AR against shield and dual tank suits. It will no longer be able to engage those types at longer ranges as people will simply be able to get to cover before you can even get into the armor reserves. People can say what they want about ScR with the -20 to armor. They still eat through armor because of the extremely high initial damage. I will begrudgingly accept 15/15, but I would rather have it 10/10. It's that kinda the point though since Projectile weapons are supposed to be tuned to fight armor and not shields? Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP Calcs
LEHON Xeon Ahrendee Mercenaries 690	Posted - 2014.09.04 23:30:00 - [28] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: LEHON Xeon wrote: What concerns me so highly is that it makes the CR almost ineffectual at longer ranges against dual tanked or shield based suits. I don't think that it should have an imbalance of 5/10, but 20/20 is ridiculous. CR is supposed to be a mid-longer range weapon. At longer ranges, I know full well it is going to go the way of the AR against shield and dual tank suits. It will no longer be able to engage those types at longer ranges as people will simply be able to get to cover before you can even get into the armor reserves. People can say what they want about ScR with the -20 to armor. They still eat through armor because of the extremely high initial damage. I will begrudgingly accept 15/15, but I would rather have it 10/10. It's that kinda the point though since Projectile weapons are supposed to be tuned to fight armor and not shields? I'm just concerned that ScR and heavies are going to become even more stronger and dominant than what it is due to this. Just from who I squad up with and what I do myself in matches for fittings, CR as it is keeps ScR/heavies in check at those longer ranges. RR I've found to be way to inaccurate for that function, especially against suits with higher armor reserves as the kick is much to high for any type of sustained fire rate. LR works pretty good if you have the proper skills and a good aiming style. Like I said, ScR still eats though armor at long ranges without much trouble because of the high initial damage along with practically insta-ganking shields. I've used it and been killed by it, and that is what I've found. Why am I still here yet?
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3061	Posted - 2014.09.04 23:36:00 - [29] - Quote Well that may be true, though I think they're looking at tweaking the ScR some because of the issues you've pointed out? I haven't been following that discussion as closely. Even so I predict they'll go with a -15/+15 setup, so we'll just have to see how it goes post-Delta. Hotfix Delta Sentinel eHP Calcs
LEHON Xeon Ahrendee Mercenaries 690	Posted - 2014.09.04 23:49:00 - [30] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Well that may be true, though I think they're looking at tweaking the ScR some because of the issues you've pointed out? I haven't been following that discussion as closely. Even so I predict they'll go with a -15/+15 setup, so we'll just have to see how it goes post-Delta. I hope it's going to be 15/15. I wouldn't want it any higher. Between the ScR damage and the Gallente/Amarr sentinel resistances to projectile weapons already, it's going to turn kind of ugly I think. The +15 or +20 to armor does seem exciting, but I just feel that the drawbacks to longer range combat due to the increase negative against shields is going to not be good. Why am I still here yet?

Sclompton Face-Smasher uptown456 88	Posted - 2014.09.05 02:56:00 - [31] - Quote TYCHUS MAXWELL wrote: Michael Arck wrote: Its really not. All the variables cannot be seen. Thats why math says one thing but.in lab tests demonstrates something else. In programming, that's called bugs. Programming is not the same as laboratory tests. In a virtual environment that doesn't adhere to any unknown/unaware conditions the math is all that we need to go on. You shouldn't balance a game on bugs you should fix the bugs, your point is still a cop out and moot. If you do feel so strongly that the math can't be trusted you at least need to present a real reason why instead of a hypothetical stance that something else could happen like a tank could fall out of the sky crushing the amarr tanker. This is why I referenced chicken little. That is a children's story specifically about people fearing the unknown and making a big deal out of it against evidence to the contrary. When will CCP fix their bugs? Soontm Playstyle: Scout, Passionate In-bred Sniper, Support, and Enemy finder Weapon: Pro Shotty, Sniper, and Scrambler Rifle
Kin Cat Another Clone in the Wall 27	Posted - 2014.09.05 16:45:00 - [32] - Quote in this case i think they should go 15/15 instead of 20


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 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 OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 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, OMG Labs. 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.