Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 22:47:00 -
[1]
In CCP's latest devblog ( http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=735&aid=105650 ) it is reveiled the new standings system will be simplified from the current slider to a mere 5 options. They do this without giving any real explanation.
Now I am not saying they should do away with the colours, or the simplification entirely. It makes for quite a nice UI and is for a lot of people a lot more usable. However, for the people (the large 0.0 alliances) to whom standings are a big deal and serious business, these 5 options may be insufficient. In the devblog CCP acknowledges that these problems may occur.
This topic proposes that CCP allows for the old method to still be used. This could perhaps be done through a 'Detail View' option in the standings menu, or similar option. The UI can still be clean and simple by default - but those who want to should be able to see the detailed standings.
A common thread in the proposal to overhaul corporate management tools, submitted in CSM3, was the request for more detailed settings. Not less. Don't make corporate management even harder.
Due to the limitations of CCP's proposed system, we risk losing some of the more interesting facets of 0.0 relations and politics. And while most players live in high sec, people don't join Eve because they heard about Eve's mission system. They join because they hear about the intricate, machiavellian 0.0 politics and conflicts. Don't jeapardise that facet of Eve. Director of Education :: EVE University CSM1 delegate and CSM3 chairman
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 22:57:00 -
[2]
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 23:29:00 -
[3]
I'll just copy my comment from the dev blog thread:
How about this: Have the same bar we have now, but below it stick those five coloured buttons, and have pressing them set people to the appropriate standing? It'd let people who don't care set people to +10/+5/0/-5/-10 with one click, but leave in the more powerful options for those who actually do care. Perhaps make the simplified system be what's used for standings set by individuals, if you want it to be more intuitive for them, but let corps and alliances have the detailed version as an option.
|
Dr BattleSmith
PAX Interstellar Services
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 01:04:00 -
[4]
Do not remove the ability to set standings to NPC corps.
Why is usable functionality being removed?
|
343guilty1
Gallente Strategic Insanity
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 04:11:00 -
[5]
Agreed, when I read the post, i was already thinking about this sort of thing, and although not being in 0.0 yet (emphasis ;) we're looking for a good alliance to join) but i can see where it comes in handy to have the real numbers, but maybe the decimals are not needed and thus can be refined into a 1-10 integers (corresponding with their negative counter-parts of course) And translating this new number system without decimals into a more broad color scheme.
|
Sleepless Heretic
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 06:44:00 -
[6]
Support. ATM I see ally reds, corp reds, and my private reds. Looking at the standing I can guess which one it is and why is that person red e.g. 1.1 - I don`t like his bio, 1.8 - he is fun to kill, 1.3 - ninja-looter and so on, 1.7 - needs to be traced on common ship etc. etc. (I know about notes and use them as well.) Should I remember all that folks by names? No thank you! Does anybody like those colour squares that much? Fine! Why not add them to the existing system, just like a shortcut to -10, -5, 0, +5, +10 positions?
Eve is not a plain game to play, but heck, I think nobody wants it to be one! debellare superbos |
MEGA D0CENT
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 07:08:00 -
[7]
Agreed. If some ppl want to have a simple standing system - they already can set -10 -5 0 +5 +10 and see 5 color square. I want to can set -7, -1, +1, +3.. etc.
|
Aineko Macx
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 08:38:00 -
[8]
Yes.
|
RootEmerger
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 09:35:00 -
[9]
Dunno, it looks like this is more a lag issue than a usability issue - it reduce to two bits the standing poll from 8 bits, in a big fight it could have quite an impact (more from a database polling side than a bandwidth side).
Maybe replace the finer grained standing with better notes, like adding corp condivided notes/ally condivided notes (obv. with rules to prevent spamming) about player/corp/ally?
|
Jared Ulfsuun
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 10:17:00 -
[10]
At the very least there should be 7 increments, not 5: 7 and 5 both take 3 bits to store.
|
|
Dierdra Vaal
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 16:58:00 -
[11]
I support my own proposal, of course. Director of Education :: EVE University CSM1 delegate and CSM3 chairman
|
GavinCapacitor
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 17:35:00 -
[12]
Edited by: GavinCapacitor on 26/02/2010 17:36:08 Lets face it, most groups use the -10/-5/0/5/10 system, because that how many icons there are.
If doing this change makes things less laggy, then I am all for it.
However, as has been pointed out, you could have 7 options with 3 bits (which you also need for 5). I think they could either -A) go with 4 options (-10/0/5/10 - think about it, if they are -5 or -10 you are still going to shoot them) or -B) have 7 options (possibly with another set of 2 icons) without too much trouble.
edit: not supported because there is no difference between 2 and 3 standing for players and lag is bad.
|
Drake Draconis
Shadow Cadre Looney Toons.
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 17:39:00 -
[13]
Supported.
Currently it has the ability to be complex or simple... doesn't matter how many use it.
If its a lag issue then yes simplify it but don't do it to the point of nerfing the ability to use its ability to track.
*IBFGITRIDOFNAPSNAO* ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= |
dardolalt
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 19:23:00 -
[14]
Supported
|
Red Raider
Airbourne Demons DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.02.26 19:51:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Red Raider on 26/02/2010 19:51:05
Quote: Due to the limitations of CCP's proposed system, we risk losing some of the more interesting facets of 0.0 relations and politics. And while most players live in high sec, people don't join Eve because they heard about Eve's mission system. They join because they hear about the intricate, machiavellian 0.0 politics and conflicts. Don't jeapardise that facet of Eve.
If that is why everyone joined EVE then why does the vast majority of people actually playing EVE live happily in highsec completely unaware and uncaring of .0 and its politics? When I joined eve .0 alliances and such were a sparkle in someones pant's some where.
That being said, I agree to an extent. It's hard to understand why the slider is going away in favor of a far simpler system. As it sits now it has 200 variables so would changing that to 5 seems oversimplification for any reason unless it has to do with the nature of incoming mechanics that are being kept under wraps. If it's a load issue then wouldn't 10 or 20 largely accomplish the same reduction in load while allowing .0 politics to continue virtually unaffected?
As of now we don't understand why it's changing, we don't need to know the exact reason but in this case I think many of us would be willing to sacrifice a little less performance for a little more functionality.
|
hankey
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.02.27 10:18:00 -
[16]
Station management really requires more than 2 options for giving access to the services
|
Ris Dnalor
Ex Cruoris Libertas
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 06:49:00 -
[17]
aye, simple is not better, eve is not about simple. people who play eve didn't stay with eve because of it's simplicity. Fire (or just flog) whoever thought simplifying anything in eve would be a good idea.
|
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 07:54:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 28/02/2010 07:56:03
Originally by: Dr BattleSmith Do not remove the ability to set standings to NPC corps.
Why is usable functionality being removed?
I think they mean the NPC only corporation, not the NPC corporations that players can join.
The 7 options suggestion seem a decent minimal compromise. In any case, after some thought, supported.
|
Garr Anders
Thukk U
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 10:11:00 -
[19]
Supported.
Especially with the new fleet finder and the option to invite ppl via standing the more detailed standings can be very handy.
E.g. you have corporations you are blue with +5 but dont want to fleet with but OTOH you have corporations you are blue with too but do want to fleet invite. This you could do by setting the standing to e.g. +6.
Keep the detailed but streamline the UI.
Also MOST if not all of "Eve is to complex/complicated" issues are linked to the horrible UI not the complexity of the game. ----- Garr Anders
"The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
|
Melcairwen Taldir
|
Posted - 2010.02.28 11:48:00 -
[20]
|
|
Ansonia Salientia
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 01:11:00 -
[21]
I would like more levels of blue and red than 5.
|
Lekegolo Khanid
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 03:47:00 -
[22]
Support for the 7 settings idea. |
Yaay
UK Corp
|
Posted - 2010.03.01 15:42:00 -
[23]
7 options, good... current system, suck.
If the only real problem is station services, and not the standings themselves, Can CCP just allow station service taxes to be set individually, rather than dependent on standings?
Beyond stations, I don't see any need for more than 5 options, but if 7 reduces lag equally well, I'll support 7.
DD changes
Docking PVP games |
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2010.03.02 08:59:00 -
[24]
keep in mind that CCP did not mention anywhere that they made this change to reduce lag - or if the change even affects lag at all. Director of Education :: EVE University CSM1 delegate and CSM3 chairman
|
Damien Anders
The Red Circle Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 06:22:00 -
[25]
supported "This wise man observed that wealth is a tool of freedom. But the pursuit of wealth is the way to slavery." |
Slimy Worm
Vivicide Vivisection.
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 06:53:00 -
[26]
Supported. Without this it'll be impossible to have NAPS without granting, say, docking rights. I don't like non-aggression pact frenzy, but players should have the choice to let people pass through their territory without giving them docking rights.
|
Slimy Worm
Vivicide Vivisection.
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 07:24:00 -
[27]
Forgot to support!
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 11:09:00 -
[28]
Raising issues/proposals on topics that are still being worked on is rather pointless.
Add your concerns in the relevant thread and suggest alternatives. The DevBlog was a courtesy-call by CCP to give us a chance to influence the outcome and help with the revamp, not a set-in-stone type of thing.
Not supporting. Objection to issue that does not yet exist.
|
Jebidus Skari
Unorganised Crime Retribution.
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 11:23:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Jebidus Skari on 03/03/2010 11:24:09 not supported.
Only on the basis on why would you want to make things more detailed standings wise? Is silly at the moment. Most people set at -10,-5,0,+5,+10 very rarely even in 0.0 alliances anything in between is used and this is shown graphically in the new UI which i think is the step in the right direction.
To be honest im not sure why we even need 5 options. Your either a friendly, a neutral or an enemy there really is no in between, and to be honest when it comes to it the only things your hear is - are they blue, are they red, are they neut that is it..
Ok perhaps theres the POS/Station Access point but what else?
I mean please explain why you would even want more detailed standings
|
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 11:37:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Jebidus Skari Edited by: Jebidus Skari on 03/03/2010 11:24:09 not supported.
Only on the basis on why would you want to make things more detailed standings wise? Is silly at the moment. Most people set at -10,-5,0,+5,+10 very rarely even in 0.0 alliances anything in between is used and this is shown graphically in the new UI which i think is the step in the right direction.
To be honest im not sure why we even need 5 options. Your either a friendly, a neutral or an enemy there really is no in between, and to be honest when it comes to it the only things your hear is - are they blue, are they red, are they neut that is it..
Ok perhaps theres the POS/Station Access point but what else?
I mean please explain why you would even want more detailed standings
we dont want MORE detailed standings - we just want the same ones we have now. Station access, fleet access and service tax all tie into standings, and as such, more standings than just 10, 5, -5 and -10 are used. YOU may not need them, but many others do.
As for bringing up a proposal to a 'future issue': it is easier to get CCP to change their mind now and not implement a bad change than it is to let them implement a bad change and then get them to change it back. I was a CSM member for two terms and know that just because something is 'in the backlog' it does not mean it will get done any time soon. Getting the point accross through the CSM as well as the comments thread will show CCP how important it is that they do not screw this up. Director of Education :: EVE University
CSM1 delegate and CSM3 chairman
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |