Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 73 post(s) |
Hashi Lebwohl
Oberon Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 18:01:00 -
[61] - Quote
In your haste to get the pirate factions you appear, carelessly I assume, to have missed the fact you had not finished the Minmatar faction v3....where are the Minmatar capitals.
If I'm going to be laughed at for flying a Hel....it should at least look amazing. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Ev0ke
294
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 18:05:00 -
[62] - Quote
Vanessa Vansen wrote:Gilbaron wrote:EcthelionStrongbow wrote:Have the details of the barge updates been posted and if so where? If not, can they be posted?
http://pastebin.com/frBc2muR <- raw data for the mining barge rebalancing, also some changes to noobships and two new modules that boost ice and merkoxit mining (thank sarmatiko for his ebil haxx0r skillz) Thanks! You managed to do post the current numbers, which was obviously too difficult for CCP!
Sarmatiko did |
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 18:06:00 -
[63] - Quote
Am I the ONLY one here so far that sees a NEW ANGEL SHIP?? - Forum warrioring since 08 and never heard of the IXION!
Machariel....Needs more cowbell.
/ Ms M
P.S. IBC??
|
Jack bubu
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
347
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 18:19:00 -
[64] - Quote
Ms Michigan wrote:Am I the ONLY one here so far that sees a NEW ANGEL SHIP?? - Forum warrioring since 08 and never heard of the IXION! Machariel....Needs more cowbell. / Ms M P.S. IBC?? its not new, its a NPC only battlecruiser irc |
marly cortez
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 18:28:00 -
[65] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:Psycho Shaishi wrote:Will there be a list of the new alchemy reactions? All the new alchemy reactions should be covered by this devblog from CCP Fozzie.
And you should see the flames about that pile of crap....EPIC. |
Ron Maudieu
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 18:30:00 -
[66] - Quote
People whining about changes? Whodthunkit |
Shepard Book
Underground Stargate
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 18:45:00 -
[67] - Quote
Next patch looks kinda cool. To the blogs! hehe |
Sarmatiko
750
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 19:09:00 -
[68] - Quote
Vanessa Vansen wrote:You managed to do post the current numbers, which was obviously too difficult for CCP! It's difficult for CCP because those numbers obviously are not final. Some of them looking like they were auto-generated (some 33.33%, 66.66% values etc.). This happens mostly with every new ship/module/change. Take this with a pinch of salt.
|
Kristen Andelare
Abacus Industries Group Aerodyne Collective
9
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 19:23:00 -
[69] - Quote
Ahh, too bad they didn't decide to go with a tiger camouflage for the Angel ships. THat would have looked sweet, and different from all other existing skins. As it is ... cow spots? They really don't look that good on the Cynabal and down, not bad on the Mach though. Tiger stripes might have looked better.
I saw that video and what Punkturis said, she was being anything but flippant. Hers was a very well thought out, very politic answer and she was being very sensitive to the feelings of the player base. Just because someone doesn't immediately agree with your criticism of their hard work does NOT make them flippant. |
Rendiff
Flashpoint Industries Imperial Hull Tankers
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 19:33:00 -
[70] - Quote
Hashi Lebwohl wrote:In your haste to get the pirate factions you appear, carelessly I assume, to have missed the fact you had not finished the Minmatar faction v3....where are the Minmatar capitals. If I'm going to be laughed at for flying a Hel....it should at least look amazing.
None of the capitals have been done yet.
|
|
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2766
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 19:44:00 -
[71] - Quote
Dinta Zembo wrote:Steijn wrote:or are we just supposed to STFU and lump it? In case you were not watching the AT, Punkturis said something like "people are afraid of change, that'll go away once people get used to the changes." Since this seems to be CCP's mindset on every UI change, I suppose the answer to your question is "yes". But you are right, it's still a crappy system, even now that I got used to it. Nevertheless, looking forward to 50% more awesome mach model.
hey! we also said that sometimes people are right and then we make adjustments!
I wasn't talking about the unified inventory because I wasn't involved in it but if you want an example then here's one: when we removed the option to lock windows when pinned.. when we realized we made a mistake when we saw all the feedback it was added back in as soon as possible.
Edit: it's also very confusing when people say the UI is broken and needs to be fixed and then I realize you guys are talking about the unified inventory and not the User Interface in general (which is was UI used to stand for and I'm pretty sure it's what it stands for in the news item because I at least have been making some changes to saved fittings). Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
None ofthe Above
301
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 19:57:00 -
[72] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Dinta Zembo wrote:Steijn wrote:or are we just supposed to STFU and lump it? In case you were not watching the AT, Punkturis said something like "people are afraid of change, that'll go away once people get used to the changes." Since this seems to be CCP's mindset on every UI change, I suppose the answer to your question is "yes". But you are right, it's still a crappy system, even now that I got used to it. Nevertheless, looking forward to 50% more awesome mach model. If Punkturis actually said that I have lost all respect for her. Such flippant remarks is what boiled the customers over last summer. The UI system was not change, it was terribly stupid change. I'd like to know who's merit bonus is swinging on the UI introduction, cause they must have incredible pull to keep it going even though it has been proven beyond a doubt to be a BAD change. edit: And what's stupid funny about this - they still can't get the Jump Freighter fuel bay to work correctly. Apparently it can't do math if you try to put too much fuel in. Lame.
Ah she just posted. Yes was going to add what she said just after what she just reiterated, "sometimes people are right and then we make adjustments"
To be honest, it is true that change often freaks people out, and that its often hard to tell in advance what changes are going to be good in the long run.
I give a lot of credit to Punkturis (CCP's best poster, at least according to Punkturis and who am I to disagree?) and Ytterbium for engaging in the forums and elsewhere to figure out how to improve EVE. I hope they drag more of the devs here or at least relay good feedback. Some teams and projects seem to work in an echo chamber convinced they have the best ideas and march off the cliff even as the community warns them, while others engage and evolve their plans based on feedback. EVE is a sandbox; The only "end-game" content in EVE is the crap that makes you rage-quit.
|
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2768
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:00:00 -
[73] - Quote
None ofthe Above wrote: I give a lot of credit to Punkturis (CCP's best poster
I'm just going to quote you like this
(and thanks!) Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Lithalnas
Privateers Privateer Alliance
120
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:09:00 -
[74] - Quote
i am looking at the new ORE ships, they all got a roughly 3x hp buff. Working as intended? Privateer Alliance, rebuilding a not so safe High Sec.-á
Want to assist in this endevor? (contract wars, corp/pilot recrutment) Contact one of our directors. |
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
158
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:09:00 -
[75] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote: Edit: it's also very confusing when people say the UI is broken and needs to be fixed and then I realize you guys are talking about the unified inventory and not the User Interface in general (which is was UI used to stand for and I'm pretty sure it's what it stands for in the news item because I at least have been making some changes to saved fittings).
Except that CCP Devs were the first ones to can the new Unifubared Insanity the new "UI"....so many ppl just started following suit...
CCP Punkturis wrote: when we removed the option to lock windows when pinned.. when we realized we made a mistake when we saw all the feedback it was added back in as soon as possible.
And another not so great example...it was borken on SiSi...was feedback'ed by pretty much everybody who tried it...and if i'm not mistaken, was not corrected until it hit TQ...after a full month of feedback...and Dev's saying "we don't believe you," and "its change, regardless, adjust." Where does that put us, the users who were 'lying' about all this, and how do you think it effects our view of CCP...? http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing -á-á < Unified Inventory is NOT ready... |
None ofthe Above
301
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:10:00 -
[76] - Quote
Kristen Andelare wrote:Ahh, too bad they didn't decide to go with a tiger camouflage for the Angel ships. THat would have looked sweet, and different from all other existing skins. As it is ... cow spots? They really don't look that good on the Cynabal and down, not bad on the Mach though. Tiger stripes might have looked better.
I saw that video and what Punkturis said, she was being anything but flippant. Hers was a very well thought out, very politic answer and she was being very sensitive to the feelings of the player base. Just because someone doesn't immediately agree with your criticism of their hard work does NOT make them flippant.
Tiger stripes would have been interesting.
EVE is a sandbox; The only "end-game" content in EVE is the crap that makes you rage-quit.
|
Anaphylacti
Catalyst ops Situation: Normal
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:20:00 -
[77] - Quote
Yes!!! Love the new fittings.
I can get back out to fight on sisi .2 seconds faster now that my cargo is saved to fit as well.
Oh yea, can you add in support to save your f# key layout on the saved fitting? That would essentially make fittings perfect.
CCP Punkturis best turis!!! |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2769
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:23:00 -
[78] - Quote
Panhead4411 wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote: when we removed the option to lock windows when pinned.. when we realized we made a mistake when we saw all the feedback it was added back in as soon as possible.
And another not so great example...it was borken on SiSi...was feedback'ed by pretty much everybody who tried it...and if i'm not mistaken, was not corrected until it hit TQ...after a full month of feedback...and Dev's saying "we don't believe you," and "its change, regardless, adjust." Where does that put us, the users who were 'lying' about all this, and how do you think it effects our view of CCP...?
I'm pretty sure we didn't say we didn't believe you because it was pretty obvious that the windows didn't act the same as they did before because we removed the option..
But I used it as an example of something we changed and then changed back to the way it was before because you guys didn't want the change.
I don't want to argue with you though because it makes me sad and also because I'm on vacation.
Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Steijn
Quay Industries
146
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:24:00 -
[79] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote: when we realized we made a mistake when we saw all the feedback it was added back in as soon as possible..
as posted slightly above, most of these tree (UI/Inventory/Lagfest, call if what you will) issues, were mentioned in the SiSi feedback thread and were simply ignored.
Soundwave mentioned that he knew they had made a mistake, but he also said this would be worked upon until we were happy. Hate to say this, but by the time you lot decide to mend it, the ones who disliked it wont be here.......or is that his idea? |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2770
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:29:00 -
[80] - Quote
Steijn wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote: when we realized we made a mistake when we saw all the feedback it was added back in as soon as possible.. as posted slightly above, most of these tree (UI/Inventory/Lagfest, call if what you will) issues, were mentioned in the SiSi feedback thread and were simply ignored. Soundwave mentioned that he knew they had made a mistake, but he also said this would be worked upon until we were happy. Hate to say this, but by the time you lot decide to mend it, the ones who disliked it wont be here.......or is that his idea?
why didn't you quote my whole paragraph where it said I wasn't talking about the unified inventory but took an example of the windows being locked while pinned
CCP Punkturis wrote: I wasn't talking about the unified inventory because I wasn't involved in it but if you want an example then here's one: when we removed the option to lock windows when pinned.. when we realized we made a mistake when we saw all the feedback it was added back in as soon as possible.
will you please not take my words out of context?
I'll say it again, I'm not involved in the unified inventory I can't and won't comment on it. Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
843
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:31:00 -
[81] - Quote
*] Hulk armorHP: 1013.0 => 2300.0 capacity: 8000.0 => 500.0 eliteBonusBarge2: -3.0 => -4.0 hp: 2531.0 => 2500.0 shieldCapacity: 1519.0 => 2700.0 shieldRechargeRate: 625000.0 => 1000000.0 [+] specialOreHoldCapacity: 7500.0
Same yield as the current hulk, and 77% more shields.
I tank my hulk to 23.3K EHP. With these modes it will be pushing 36k. Before fleet boost. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Steijn
Quay Industries
146
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:34:00 -
[82] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:Steijn wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote: when we realized we made a mistake when we saw all the feedback it was added back in as soon as possible.. as posted slightly above, most of these tree (UI/Inventory/Lagfest, call if what you will) issues, were mentioned in the SiSi feedback thread and were simply ignored. Soundwave mentioned that he knew they had made a mistake, but he also said this would be worked upon until we were happy. Hate to say this, but by the time you lot decide to mend it, the ones who disliked it wont be here.......or is that his idea? why didn't you quote my whole paragraph where it said I wasn't talking about the unified inventory but took an example of the windows being locked while pinned CCP Punkturis wrote: I wasn't talking about the unified inventory because I wasn't involved in it but if you want an example then here's one: when we removed the option to lock windows when pinned.. when we realized we made a mistake when we saw all the feedback it was added back in as soon as possible.
will you please not take my words out of context? I'll say it again, I'm not involved in the unified inventory I can't and won't comment on it.
my point was that members of CCP are not reading from the same hymn sheet. You were quite willing to consider the feedback and then roll-back an option when you understood that the change was wrong (which is commendable). Soundwave on the other hand, admits the UI was flawed, but continually tries to apply band-aids to it when to be perfectly honest, you will never get the true functionality of the old system back by continually patching it up.
EDIT: and it certainly wasnt a dig at you as to be perfectly blunt about it, if some of the male members of CCP showed the same amount of balls that you do by actually commenting in these threads, things would be far better. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8695
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:38:00 -
[83] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Same yield as the current hulk, and 77% more shields.
I tank my hulk to 23.3K EHP. With these modes it will be pushing 36k. Before fleet boost. It basically gets an MSEII and an 800mm plate for free. I trust miners will still fit it with empty mids and MLUs to ensure that they still fail to get more than 10k EHP.
GǪand then come and whine about how they still get ganked by destroyers (which, as you point out, is already something they can prevent). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
352
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:38:00 -
[84] - Quote
Steijn wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:Steijn wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote: when we realized we made a mistake when we saw all the feedback it was added back in as soon as possible.. as posted slightly above, most of these tree (UI/Inventory/Lagfest, call if what you will) issues, were mentioned in the SiSi feedback thread and were simply ignored. Soundwave mentioned that he knew they had made a mistake, but he also said this would be worked upon until we were happy. Hate to say this, but by the time you lot decide to mend it, the ones who disliked it wont be here.......or is that his idea? why didn't you quote my whole paragraph where it said I wasn't talking about the unified inventory but took an example of the windows being locked while pinned CCP Punkturis wrote: I wasn't talking about the unified inventory because I wasn't involved in it but if you want an example then here's one: when we removed the option to lock windows when pinned.. when we realized we made a mistake when we saw all the feedback it was added back in as soon as possible.
will you please not take my words out of context? I'll say it again, I'm not involved in the unified inventory I can't and won't comment on it. my point was that members of CCP are not reading from the same hymn sheet. You were quite willing to consider the feedback and then roll-back an option when you understood that the change was wrong (which is commendable). Soundwave on the other hand, admits the UI was flawed, but continually tries to apply band-aids to it when to be perfectly honest, you will never get the true functionality of the old system back by continually patching it up.
Until some one besides Punkturis starts talking to us lets thank her and let her get back to her vacation.
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
4050
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:51:00 -
[85] - Quote
Lucas Quaan wrote:CCP Phantom wrote:Also we would like to draw your attention to the new video V3 shader for Angel ships here. I don't like to complain, but where is the rust? These people are outcasts from the Minmatar and should be to hobos what hobos are to regular people, not these shiny black-and-white leopard cammo thingies.
I dont ever recall jovian ships ever being rusty.
|
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
158
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:53:00 -
[86] - Quote
Salpun wrote: Right click options are back and the drag out windows are on Sisi.
Yes and No. Most of them are back, still no way to access the Corp hanger in orca without using the bloody tree. And likewise...no way to open a station Corp Hanger w/o using the tree.
Please make this tree fully optional..PLEASE.
Also, the open/closed states of the Main Inventory window in both space and station are still tied to other. Big inventory window open in station = good. Big inventory window opening at undock b/c it was last opened in station = not good. http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing -á-á < Unified Inventory is NOT ready... |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
4050
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:53:00 -
[87] - Quote
My biggest question is where is the new mineral cost of the bargest which of the three hulls is setting it, Im asking it because I need it for my project so I can go ahead and start working on my FnI idea's blueprints.
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
846
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 20:57:00 -
[88] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Same yield as the current hulk, and 77% more shields.
I tank my hulk to 23.3K EHP. With these modes it will be pushing 36k. Before fleet boost. It basically gets an MSEII and an 800mm plate for free. I trust miners will still fit it with empty mids and MLUs to ensure that they still fail to get more than 10k EHP. GǪand then come and whine about how they still get ganked by destroyers (which, as you point out, is already something they can prevent).
My fit actually has one MLU. Its adding the second one really screws the ability to tank. I guess many do not get that for a mere 9% loss of yield you get a strong tank.
Also as ore now goes into a special hold, cargo opts and expanders are little help in carrying ore. That may entice many miners to rig for tank. Those who do not figure that out get to explode.
The Skiff is also of interest. It has over twice the tank of a Hulk, and all you lose in yield is the 3% per exhumer level bonus. Once it is in PYFA Ill see if it still can have a good tank with 2 MLUs. If so, then that may be the hot ticket. The extra MLU will cancel out most of the loss of the Hulks bonus.
BTW, the Skiff will still have just one strip, with a +200% yield bonus. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
369
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 21:00:00 -
[89] - Quote
CCP Punkturis don't take all these comments about Unified Inventory personly, these people fail to understand you had nothing to do with it... if you had, it would have been close to perfect from the start... we wouldn't have lost functionality the old inventory had (much functionality/features which is still missing)
Because you are simply awesome!
And with these kind words, can you poke the correct dev and make them improve warp acceleration mechanics? :) and ask Veritas to make those prefired modules I talked with him about... server sided soon?
Luv you Christmas wish list https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134275 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934 |
Hustomte
The Scope
77
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 21:09:00 -
[90] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:The Skiff is also of interest...
Dont forget the Skiff also LOSES its +2 warp strength ...Signature... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |