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) |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
1923
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 14:45:00 -
[1] - Quote
EVE Online: Inferno 1.2 will be deployed on Wednesday, August 8.
We are looking forward to bring you with Inferno 1.2 the V3 shader graphic improvements for all Angel pirate faction ships. We also continue our initiative to balance New Eden by adjusting frigs and adding all remaining moon mineral alchemy reactions. Also we have improvements to the user interface and a lot more. Stay tuned for more details the coming days!
Check our Inferno 1.2 feature page for more information! Also watch our forums and further announcement for a detailed deployment schedule and the full patch notes.
Also we would like to draw your attention to the new video V3 shader for Angel ships here.
CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
EcthelionStrongbow
PROCORP
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 14:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
Have the details of the barge updates been posted and if so where? If not, can they be posted?
|
ChromeStriker
The Riot Formation Executive Outcomes
189
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:02:00 -
[3] - Quote
Mining barge sneak peak?
- Nulla Curas |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
1923
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:03:00 -
[4] - Quote
EcthelionStrongbow wrote:Have the details of the barge updates been posted and if so where? If not, can they be posted?
We are working to bring you the details of the changes as soon as possible. Due to vacation time and sickness we were not able to publish the details right away.
CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
350
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:05:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:EcthelionStrongbow wrote:Have the details of the barge updates been posted and if so where? If not, can they be posted? We are working to bring you the details of the changes as soon as possible. Due to vacation time and sickness we were not able to publish the details right away. Changes in build 8942?
Need them for the Sisi change thread. |
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
155
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:07:00 -
[6] - Quote
Why sooo black? I'm tired of seeing all my favorite ships getting re-textured to look like they were drug through poo or dipped in old motor oil.
And holy Dramiel Batman!!! That thing is HUGE now....it doesn't look right compared to other frigs now.
What about the bloody Inventory updates???? The ones that were promised on a weekly basis? http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing -á-á < Unified Inventory is NOT ready... |
FHM
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
10
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:09:00 -
[7] - Quote
Will this patch include the changed to Global Criminal Countdown aka. GCC ? |
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
59
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:12:00 -
[8] - Quote
Reading about a mining update, finding a bunch of links to sites with no information about mining changes. Interesting. |
Steijn
Quay Industries
135
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:16:00 -
[9] - Quote
What about the UI? What improvements are you making to the fail inventory system you have forced upon us? or are we just supposed to STFU and lump it? |
Erzak Ormand
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:22:00 -
[10] - Quote
I'm interested in hearing about the new Barge updates :D
Quote:Reading about a mining update, finding a bunch of links to sites with no information about mining changes. Interesting. They just said due to vacation time and sickness they were unable to post the details. They are human you know.
Steijn wrote:What about the UI? What improvements are you making to the fail inventory system you have forced upon us? or are we just supposed to STFU and lump it? I personally enjoy the new Inventory system. I keeps me from having to open 10 different windows. |
|
Steijn
Quay Industries
135
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:23:00 -
[11] - Quote
Erzak Ormand wrote:I'm interested in hearing about the new Barge updates :D Quote:Reading about a mining update, finding a bunch of links to sites with no information about mining changes. Interesting. They just said due to vacation time and sickness they were unable to post the details. They are human you know. Steijn wrote:What about the UI? What improvements are you making to the fail inventory system you have forced upon us? or are we just supposed to STFU and lump it? I personally enjoy the new Inventory system. I keeps me from having to open 10 different windows.
im mainly talking about the lag it has created. Its still at a level that is not acceptable imo. |
Madlof Chev
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
68
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:26:00 -
[12] - Quote
Oh, people are still whining about the inventory. I'm glad I don't come to these forums often, I can only take so much repetitive bleating from degenerates with a bee in their panties. |
Steijn
Quay Industries
135
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:28:00 -
[13] - Quote
Madlof Chev wrote:Oh, people are still whining about the inventory. I'm glad I don't come to these forums often, I can only take so much repetitive bleating from degenerates with a bee in their panties.
im only still here because i was stupid enough to re-subscribe just before they released it. Trust me, if it isnt sorted by the time the subs run out, you wont have to worry about me anymore. |
Brokers Clone
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:28:00 -
[14] - Quote
Erzak Ormand wrote:I personally enjoy the new Inventory system. It keeps me from having to open 10 different windows.
Shouldn't that be... Prevents you from being able to...? |
Psycho Shaishi
Botanica Inc. Solar Citizens
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:33:00 -
[15] - Quote
Will there be a list of the new alchemy reactions? |
Wu Jiaqiu
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
37
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:36:00 -
[16] - Quote
Alright, I hate to say it but the features page sucks. It sucks balls. Its nothing pictures. Theres nothing written really detailed about the patch or changes at all. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:36:00 -
[17] - Quote
Steijn wrote:What about the UI? What improvements are you making to the fail inventory system you have forced upon us? or are we just supposed to STFU and lump it?
Seriously tired of double shift clicking - service a POS or Pi CCP and see how you like it.
|
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:37:00 -
[18] - Quote
The only thing that will be fair about alchemy is if CCP random rolls the reactions just before they release. CCP NDA security would make a good sieve for my kitchen.
|
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
1926
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:38:00 -
[19] - Quote
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. CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
351
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:38:00 -
[20] - Quote
Psycho Shaishi wrote:Will there be a list of the new alchemy reactions? There was a devblog last week with all the first draft versions of the changes. Beaten to it lol |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
351
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:40:00 -
[21] - Quote
Wu Jiaqiu wrote:Alright, I hate to say it but the features page sucks. It sucks balls. Its nothing pictures. Theres nothing written really detailed about the patch or changes at all. That is what devblogs are for. |
Wingmate
Raven's Flight Vanguard.
29
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:46:00 -
[22] - Quote
Steijn wrote:Madlof Chev wrote:Oh, people are still whining about the inventory. I'm glad I don't come to these forums often, I can only take so much repetitive bleating from degenerates with a bee in their panties. im only still here because i was stupid enough to re-subscribe just before they released it. Trust me, if it isnt sorted by the time the subs run out, you wont have to worry about me anymore. you're going to unsubscribe from a video game because the inventory makes you mad?
what the hell is wrong with these people? this is like when they changed ship spinning and people were unsubbing. better off without them. |
Y'nit Gidrine
Gold Horizons Industrial
10
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:47:00 -
[23] - Quote
Brokers Clone wrote:Erzak Ormand wrote:I personally enjoy the new Inventory system. It keeps me from having to open 10 different windows. Shouldn't that be... Prevents you from being able to...?
You can open an inventory in a new window by holding shift when you open the inventory. You can do this either by holding shift while you click "open cargo" or even by holding shift while clicking on the entry in the unified inventory system.
|
Dinta Zembo
Snuff Box
74
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 15:56:00 -
[24] - Quote
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. |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
29
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:02:00 -
[25] - Quote
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. |
Steijn
Quay Industries
139
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:03:00 -
[26] - Quote
Wingmate wrote:Steijn wrote:Madlof Chev wrote:Oh, people are still whining about the inventory. I'm glad I don't come to these forums often, I can only take so much repetitive bleating from degenerates with a bee in their panties. im only still here because i was stupid enough to re-subscribe just before they released it. Trust me, if it isnt sorted by the time the subs run out, you wont have to worry about me anymore. you're going to unsubscribe from a video game because the inventory makes you mad? what the hell is wrong with these people? this is like when they changed ship spinning and people were unsubbing. better off without them.
no, im going to unsubscribe from a video game because the forced upon us UI makes this enjoyable game, no longer enjoyable.
I dont see any reason why I should continue to subsidise a firm which says they listen to its subscribers, when the evidence proves that they may listen, but they only hear what they want to hear. |
R0ze
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
6
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:12:00 -
[27] - Quote
I don't understand the concept of camouflage skins in space (ok I know I'm way too late since navy mega and the rest allready got theirs) but still.. What is the reason? Hide between asteriods? |
Gustav Mannfred
The Black Suicidegankers
36
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:16:00 -
[28] - Quote
is that correct, that the machariel gets descaled by 500m and the cynabal and dramiel upscaled? i'm REALY miss the old stuff.-á
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=24183 |
Komen
Capital Enrichment Services The Night Crew Alliance
110
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:18:00 -
[29] - Quote
I do not mind the inventory system per se.
I DO mind the lag that got introduced, and has not improved, while using the inventory in a POS in wormhole space.
AT BEST ship swapping is around 5 seconds, no biggie. AT WORST I swapped to a battleship, initiated a gang-warp. The gang, including my battleship, was still sitting in the POS on my screen. On my corp-mate's screens, however, my ship warped with them to a wormhole we were crushing. We delayed the crush. I then issued a 'warp to planet' gang warp. Once again, my corpmates see my ship in a fleet warp. I was STILL looking at the pos, and could access hangars.
It is NOT the inventory itself that is a problem, it is the CRIPPLING LAG that got introduced with it that is the problem. |
Kaycerra
Black Lotus Heavy Industries Ethereal Dawn
4
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:26:00 -
[30] - Quote
New dev blog page is frustratingly inspecific. Clicking each feature simply takes you to the next slideshow screen of features, without providing any real detail, further description, or link to dev blogs commenting on said feature.
Also, would it really hurt to lighten up the ships I bit? Eve is so dark anyways, that if you don't have the sun behind the camera against the ship, you can't make out much on them anyways. Making big chunks of ships like the machariel really dark, just makes a really nice model have indistinguishable features. |
|
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
157
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:28:00 -
[31] - Quote
Gustav Mannfred wrote:is that correct, that the machariel gets descaled by 500m and the cynabal and dramiel upscaled?
Yes. I think they are starting to upscale all the ships so that the smaller NPC frigate rats can actually have space to fit the 5 turrets, 4 launchers and still see the ships hull....NPC mission 'breacher' hull for example...looks like someone welded as many turrets/launchers that they could find onto whatever surface they could find.
Just give them player builds and tweak their dmg amounts...no need to pile on the turrets when the hull can't even fit them. http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing -á-á < Unified Inventory is NOT ready... |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8689
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:32:00 -
[32] - Quote
Erzak Ormand wrote:I personally enjoy the new Inventory system. I keeps me from having to open 10 different windows. The old inventory system kept me from having to open 10 different windows. At no point would I ever need (or even be able to, without additional work) to open more than four. The new UI forces me to open more windows than ever. I suppose I could contain it in one window, but that would make it four times slower (excluding UI lag) than before.
Either way, not enjoyable.
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?
|
Solstice Project
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1630
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:33:00 -
[33] - Quote
Cow patterns on angel ships.
...
COW patterns on angel ships.
.....
COW PATTERNED ANGEL SHIPS AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA XD XD XD XD XD !!!!!!!!!!!!
Seriously, i don't know what to think of it, but it really makes me laugh ! :D Inappropriate signature removed. Spitfire |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
277
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:36:00 -
[34] - Quote
Steijn wrote:What about the UI? What improvements are you making to the fail inventory system you have forced upon us? or are we just supposed to STFU and lump it? Although I'm not thinking we needed the inventory change they gave us.. and though there were a lot of problems with it when it first arrived.. I can bite my tough and use it IF ccp can please add the ORE BAY ENTRY back in the ORCA right click menu for in space mining ops. Without this it becomes a chore to dig an existing window back open and fish in the minimzed column for the ORE BAY to click on.
Without this ore bay start up entry the lack is a nagging reminder that the inventory system isn't quite as good as the original system. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG] |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:42:00 -
[35] - 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.
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.
|
Psycho Shaishi
Botanica Inc. Solar Citizens
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:47:00 -
[36] - 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.
But is it the final and accurate list? Because a random "we decided to make a few twinks" right before or after the patch can really screw someones preparations.
|
Mad Mobius
Pandora Sphere
6
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:53:00 -
[37] - Quote
Kaycerra wrote:New dev blog page is frustratingly inspecific. Clicking each feature simply takes you to the next slideshow screen of features, without providing any real detail, further description, or link to dev blogs commenting on said feature. I agree about the how inspecific the devblog is. It is filled with a whole lot of nothing. The V3 has been around on sisi for a minute. Will there be another blog when the patchnotes get released? Rabble Rabble PATCH NOTES! |
Marcus Loon Black
V.O.I.D. The Methodical Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:54:00 -
[38] - Quote
I will miss the Beat up, Used feel of the Cynabal
But now it has Space Camo what ever that is worth when Destroying helpless Carebears
|
Xyrrath Actault
Confederation Navy Research Epsilon Fleet
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:55:00 -
[39] - Quote
Would love to see some extra info for mining barges so I can edit my Mining Fleet statistics. |
Chokichi Ozuwara
Royal One Piece Corporation Deadly Unknown
382
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:56:00 -
[40] - Quote
Madlof Chev wrote:Oh, people are still whining about the inventory. I'm glad I don't come to these forums often, I can only take so much repetitive bleating from degenerates with a bee in their panties. Oh, the irony of someone from Reddit complaining about repetitive bleating ... Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round. |
|
LoRDa RaMOs
The Dark Space Initiative
19
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:57:00 -
[41] - 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.
Please quit it. Already.
I'd like to point the devs (again) to these wonderful suggestions from he community:
Dual pane inventory FTW! http://i.imgur.com/j8Jyn.jpg A good list of stuff https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1239629#post1239629
Something unrelated to the UI for a change https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1649019#post1649019
And the commend about angel cow ships... Awesome.!
Maybe it's time for some extra love on the UI again. |
VLAD VIRONS
X-SENSE Security
23
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 16:58:00 -
[42] - Quote
This camouflage pwnage
|
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
1927
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:14:00 -
[43] - Quote
Psycho Shaishi wrote: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. But is it the final and accurate list? Because a random "we decided to make a few twinks" right before or after the patch can really screw someones preparations. The final stats are always published in the patch notes. The above mentioned dev blog specifically says that numbers still can change. If some numbers would change, then we wouldn't do that because we want to screw over our players and then laugh at then, we would do such a change only because we would think that it is essential and very important. CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Ev0ke
292
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:18:00 -
[44] - Quote
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) |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
1927
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:21:00 -
[45] - Quote
Xyrrath Actault wrote:Would love to see some extra info for mining barges so I can edit my Mining Fleet statistics. We will publish these numbers as soon as they are finalized! We had and have some well deserved summer vacations recently and also some people were sick and couldn't work.
CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
Aenrea
Terpene Conglomerate
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:27:00 -
[46] - Quote
If someone from devs knows the answer to this question, please reply - Will Micro Jump Drive make it in to this release? :) (I read somewhere, it could be included in august release)
Thanks! |
Selas Rega
New Republic The Initiative.
12
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:27:00 -
[47] - Quote
Still no fixes for the inventory? |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
351
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:32:00 -
[48] - Quote
Selas Rega wrote:Still no fixes for the inventory? Right click options are back and the drag out windows are on Sisi. |
Lyron-Baktos
Selective Pressure Rote Kapelle
279
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:33:00 -
[49] - Quote
can we get a dev blog from the art team sometime soon? really would like to know where they are wanting to take the art. Especially with making all the ships much darker and muted than originally On holiday. -áIn some other world. Where the music of the radio was a labyrinth of sonorous colours. To a bright centre of absolute convicton where the dripping patchouli was more than scent, It was a sun-á |
Komen
Capital Enrichment Services The Night Crew Alliance
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:34:00 -
[50] - Quote
CCP Phantom, any word on whether the problems with inventory induced lag in POSes is being further addressed? I know we're a small segment of the population but it's a really frustrating problem
I'm sure other wormhole dwellers, and probably 0.0 POS dwellers, would like to know. |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
351
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:35:00 -
[51] - Quote
Komen wrote:CCP Phantom, any word on whether the problems with inventory induced lag in POSes is being further addressed? I know we're a small segment of the population but it's a really frustrating problem
I'm sure other wormhole dwellers, and probably 0.0 POS dwellers, would like to know. Only way to know is to build a pos on Sisi and find out. Sadly |
Rrama Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
69
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:41:00 -
[52] - Quote
Micro jump drive coming with this release??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Any New Modules?!?!?!?!?1
We were told modules would be a continually released evolving development, so far we have seen 1.1 and now 1.2 but no mention of new modules? come on guys do us proper.
Lag on POS's seems fine i have one with ~60 mods and all loads nice and snappy on sisi...
'....
I WILL SOOOOO BACK THIS UP
"Can we get a dev blog from the art team soon"
I mean seriously, the lack of the summit minutes, and the lack of any art blogs in what feels like forever has me truely depressed. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:41:00 -
[53] - Quote
Salpun wrote:Komen wrote:CCP Phantom, any word on whether the problems with inventory induced lag in POSes is being further addressed? I know we're a small segment of the population but it's a really frustrating problem
I'm sure other wormhole dwellers, and probably 0.0 POS dwellers, would like to know. Only way to know is to build a pos on Sisi and find out. Sadly
Would that even be a good test? Where's the lag coming from, client or server? Sisi, being lightly loaded most of the time, wouldn't be a good test if server side. I'm betting on server side, btw.
|
Horus V
4
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:42:00 -
[54] - Quote
I hope you guys improve the new UI. Im tired of ussing shift keys and closing windows by myself. Nobody is happy about it and its not something we can adapt to - its somethig that has to be changed. ( make it bahave just like old Ui, keep the tree closed untill someone needs it)
Edited: ah yes and ussing POS its laggy and slow as hell !!!! |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:43:00 -
[55] - Quote
LoRDa RaMOs wrote:
Please quit it. Already.
Uh let me think on that for a split of a second. No.
|
Komen
Capital Enrichment Services The Night Crew Alliance
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:45:00 -
[56] - Quote
Salpun wrote:Komen wrote:CCP Phantom, any word on whether the problems with inventory induced lag in POSes is being further addressed? I know we're a small segment of the population but it's a really frustrating problem
I'm sure other wormhole dwellers, and probably 0.0 POS dwellers, would like to know. Only way to know is to build a pos on Sisi and find out. Sadly
Thus far. We'll see. I've stuck by this (terrible, amusing, crazy, deep, silly, awesome) game for so long its become an ingrained habit. CCP has gotten better at communicating but still has some room to improve. I don't need an answer right NOW, but say, within a couple days. Even just to say 'sorry, nothing currently planned for this patch'. I'd be disappointed in the lack of attention but pleased by an honest reply. Silence is the worst. |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
351
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:46:00 -
[57] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Salpun wrote:Komen wrote:CCP Phantom, any word on whether the problems with inventory induced lag in POSes is being further addressed? I know we're a small segment of the population but it's a really frustrating problem
I'm sure other wormhole dwellers, and probably 0.0 POS dwellers, would like to know. Only way to know is to build a pos on Sisi and find out. Sadly Would that even be a good test? Where's the lag coming from, client or server? Sisi, being lightly loaded most of the time, wouldn't be a good test if server side. I'm betting on server side, btw. how many pos do you use and where?
Is the issue large ammont of items in the pos or is it lots of mudules? |
Komen
Capital Enrichment Services The Night Crew Alliance
115
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:50:00 -
[58] - Quote
Salpun wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:Salpun wrote:Komen wrote:CCP Phantom, any word on whether the problems with inventory induced lag in POSes is being further addressed? I know we're a small segment of the population but it's a really frustrating problem
I'm sure other wormhole dwellers, and probably 0.0 POS dwellers, would like to know. Only way to know is to build a pos on Sisi and find out. Sadly Would that even be a good test? Where's the lag coming from, client or server? Sisi, being lightly loaded most of the time, wouldn't be a good test if server side. I'm betting on server side, btw. how many pos do you use and where? Is the issue large ammont of items in the pos or is it lots of mudules?
3 ship hangars + 3 corp hangars in a cluster, various security allowances, 1 ship and 1 corp hangar are offline (to maintain a healthy level of online weaponry). This seems to be the worst. Other corp hangars in the POS, in the wall of industry for instance, don't generate this lag. Most of the lag seems to be around ship maint arrays. This is by observation only, on tranq.
|
Vanessa Vansen
Cybermana
42
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:55:00 -
[59] - Quote
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! |
Lettuce Prey
Rhinoceros Kitchen
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 17:57:00 -
[60] - Quote
ON THE UI INVENTORY THING
maybe the devs know something that we the players don't know about this new setup.
maybe they thought we would just figure it out on our own and we would see that this new way of doing the inventory is MUCH better than the old way.
much better.
that means that my problem with it is that i have not given it enough thought at finding this new and easy method of using this newer and easier inventory screen.
maybe i am just not smart enough.
so i'll just ask the question.
how is this new inventory setup better than the old one? |
|
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... |
|
Lita Lauvina
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 21:24:00 -
[91] - Quote
Some tigns form me to.
1. Hulk ****** lowered cargo hiold where you cant store even not close inaf mining crystals with my use even in one mining op. Hulks cargo hold ned to have posibility to hold all tupes off mining crystals for each type about 6 needet. curent values dont mach even close to nedet numbers.
2. mackinaws- wie waiting on next increase off ICE price again, and way the hell i need so big ore hold if that ship will mine it full like a year.
3. skifs was good allready dont nedet eny chages just was needet increase abit off shields and armor.
again ccp ****** someting up as usual. |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
538
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 21:25:00 -
[92] - Quote
Massive props and "o7" to you lot for evolving the NPE (no more Aura-talk though? Dis maek meh haz a sad)...
Please keep iterating on/evolving this as much as you can, it is critically important, as I'm sure you know.
Ideas (this might technically belong in F&I, but I'd put a whole new thread there for it, in detail. Watch that space for possible ::walloftext:: Soon(TM)):
A tutorial about d-scanner use, completion of the mission/s in this part needs both offensive and defensive use thereof.
More explicit, clearer instruction on how to position probes to scan stuff down, with more explanation of the concept of "quadrilateration" (IE triangulating in on something in 3 dimensions, which is what Apocrypha-to-present probing essentially is--don't worry, we're scii-fi nerds--we can handle it!)
Combat-probing: A tutorial mission/series of missions where one must scan down a ship to complete the objective.
Combat-tactics: Like "The Exam" final mission on the Advanced Military tutorial-arc, only more, and more advanced: NPCs use more advanced AI, will tackle you, and you have to tackle them to kill them (so remind the newbie to fit point/web, or the "boss" just warps off--maybe make the option of hunting him down if he does--with d-scan and/or probes, he just doesn't leave the system--a part of it?)
EWar: Little or nothing in the tutorials about this, there should be at least a few missions/tutorials about it, which show the racial breakdown of same.
HiSec Aggression, Criminality, and war-mechanics, Locator Agents/offensive and defensive use thereof, can-tipping, wreck/can-baiting, ninja-salvaging, and how to stay safe(-ish) during wardecs.
Suicide-ganking: Mechanics, emphasis that it can happen anytime/anywhere, and how to avoid it. Maybe one of each missions that require the player to "gank" something illegally (probably an NPC Mining Barge) and lose their ship to CONCORD, but also one that requires them to get ganked (again probably by NPCs, unless there is a way to have players "volunteer" for both sides of this?) as well.
More emphasis throughout that losing ships and/or pod is an inevitable part of EVE, and that players mustn't get too attached to "stuff" if they're to succeed in/enjoy the game enough to stay with it.
Scamming, "AWOXing," corp-infiltration/theft--how it can happen, why, and why "trust no-one" is the Second Rule of EVE(TM).
TL/DR:
More on commonly used techniques/mechanics, training NPC combat as close to a real PvP encounter as possible that a newb can reasonably solo, and a lot more on the true depth and nature of the sandbox, so all the WoW-kiddies will hopefully be culled quickly. In irae, veritas. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8699
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 21:28:00 -
[93] - Quote
Lita Lauvina wrote:1. Hulk ****** lowered cargo hiold where you cant store even not close inaf mining crystals with my use even in one mining op. Have the support craft carry it. If you absolutely have to carry them yourself, you could always fit cargo expandersGǪ
By the way, you should probably go and read the devblog on these changes and you'll understand why the Mackinaw and Skiff (and Retriever and Procurer) need the changes they're getting. 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?
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
46
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 21:29:00 -
[94] - Quote
Steijn wrote:What about the UI? What improvements are you making to the fail inventory system you have forced upon us? or are we just supposed to STFU and lump it?
^ well you could teach a course on how not to give feedback and how not to be heard. |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
171
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 21:39:00 -
[95] - 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.
One does not simply put words in CCP Punturis mouth (well, keyboard... whatever)
Katrin, just ignore them, they dont know what they are saying. Pls keep making those wonderfull features for us.
Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 21:51:00 -
[96] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote: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!)
Gotta laugh at this a bit since as within a few more responses to thread you jump on someone else for taking you out of context... Oh what a web we weave....
Thanks for filling in the rest of the story, Punkturis. Maybe the rest of the Dev's will get a clue about proactively engaging with us instead of ignoring us and hoping for the best (which rarely has happened over the past two years).
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
775
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 22:09:00 -
[97] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Thanks for filling in the rest of the story, Punkturis. Maybe the rest of the Dev's will get a clue about proactively engaging with us instead of ignoring us and hoping for the best (which rarely has happened over the past two years). Most devs at CCP read the forums very actively and diligently, and incorporate the feedback in their work. But some are not responding as actively on the forums (or on Twitter) because they are not willing to endure at times the kind of beating CCP Punkturis has been subject to here.
Don't quote out of context, don't assume that dev X has worked on feature Y, don't resort to personal attacks, be nice. Believe it or not, but we are people just like you. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Software Director | EVE Online, CCP Games | Follow on: Twitter / Google+ |
|
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2781
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 22:15:00 -
[98] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote: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!) Gotta laugh at this a bit since as within a few more responses to thread you jump on someone else for taking you out of context... Oh what a web we weave....
I was sort of making a joke of the first person who mentioned me that only quoted half of what I said in the interview.. I also made sure to make it really obvious that I was just quoting part of what he said (by cutting on a ( and pretty much mentioning it) Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Atreides 47
men of war MASQUERADE.
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 22:25:00 -
[99] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:Also we would like to draw your attention to the new video V3 shader for Angel ships here.
You got my full undivided attention. Again.
WHY Camo Angels ??? Why sh!t on Cynabal ? Don't change good old shaders on this milky piece of stupidity - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmcAl5ymojM
P.S. I like new Matar shaders, but not all of them. There is also issue with Matar T2 models being cut. Long live to Fighters ! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8702
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 22:26:00 -
[100] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Most devs at CCP read the forums very actively and diligently, and incorporate the feedback in their work. But some are not responding as actively on the forums (or on Twitter) because they are not willing to endure at times the kind of beating CCP Punkturis has been subject to here. GǪand that's fair enough, but that lack of response also puts a damper on the effort required to evaluate and compose a full detailed explanation of the kinds of problems we encounter. A lot of it will be about special features and only involve very specific details and use cases, all of which needs to be specified and explained to make the nature of the problem clear.
Doing that and then being met with absolute silence will in short order feel a lot like pissing in the wind. Now, I'm sure that behind the scenes, the well-reasoned feedback gets a whole lot more traction, but outwards, it often seems like the more harsh words is what generates a response and the reasoned ones do not. Granted, the response will rightfully be return-fire snippiness, but stillGǪ
As for assuming who worked on what, that kind of goes both ways: on your end, you can't really assume that we will always know who did work on what. And like it or not, that blue flag says GÇ£DevGÇ¥GǪ so while it may not be about a feature you personally worked on, that flag will mean that questions can and will be asked about the most odd-ball details and there is this implicit expectation that GÇ£the devsGÇ¥ will have an answer. The lines will be blurred even further when, as in this case, we have a UI feature and a UI dev that apparently worked on the team that owned that UI featureGǪ whether or not the connection actually existed within that team is pretty opaque from the outside. 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?
|
|
Hustomte
The Scope
77
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 22:32:00 -
[101] - Quote
Tippia wrote: Doing that and then being met with absolute silence will in short order feel a lot like pissing in the wind. Now, I'm sure that behind the scenes, the well-reasoned feedback gets a whole lot more traction, but outwards, it often seems like the more harsh words is what generates a response and the reasoned ones do not. Granted, the response will rightfully be return-fire snippiness, but stillGǪ
Two suggestions:
1) Its up to the community to troll the trolls, we are slacking in that department.
2) if Dev's had "team such and such" as their alliance ticker or at least said what they do, it could divert community rage. ...Signature... |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2785
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 22:40:00 -
[102] - Quote
Tippia wrote:The lines will be blurred even further when, as in this case, we have a UI feature and a UI dev that apparently worked on the team that owned that UI featureGǪ whether or not the connection actually existed within that team is pretty opaque from the outside.
I'm on Team Super Friends.
We worked on War Dec changes and new modules. We also made new Kill Reports to go with the War Reports that were a part of the War Dec UI.
My team had nothing to do with the unified inventory. Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8702
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 22:40:00 -
[103] - Quote
Hustomte wrote:Two suggestions:
1) Its up to the community to troll the trolls, we are slacking in that department.
2) if Dev's had "team such and such" as their alliance ticker or at least said what they do, it could divert community rage. I'd prefer far more draconian measuresGǪ
If they want to be hands-off in the discussions between players, by all means, but I see little reason why they can't just go GÇ£*ehhhhrrt* DELETED* on posts that provide nothing but noise in the actual information and feedback threads.
Sure, people will bawl their eyes out about censorship for a while, but they'll get the message and simply start /this:ing or /sign:ing or +1:ing the posts that express their views in a more coherent manner. 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?
|
Vultre9
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 22:48:00 -
[104] - Quote
What Dev messed with the Reaper? Can they please step forward so i may smack them on the back of the head? Bathtub Toys [Reaper] dont belong in EVE.
P.S. - yea yea yea i know that it got changed a while ago, BUT IT STILL LOOKS THE SAME!!! |
Azura Solus
Biotech Transtellar INC
25
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 22:55:00 -
[105] - Quote
[quote=CCP Punkturis I'm on Team Super Friends.
We worked on War Dec changes and new modules. We also made new Kill Reports to go with the War Reports that were a part of the War Dec UI.
My team had nothing to do with the unified inventory.[/quote]
Speaking of any changes planned in the future for stabalizeing and balancing war deccing in our future
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1384
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 22:59:00 -
[106] - Quote
Hey since you're buffing the HP on the hulk are you planning on tuning down its mining bonuses? a rogue goon |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2787
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:03:00 -
[107] - Quote
Azura Solus wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote: I'm on Team Super Friends.
We worked on War Dec changes and new modules. We also made new Kill Reports to go with the War Reports that were a part of the War Dec UI.
My team had nothing to do with the unified inventory.
Speaking of any changes planned in the future for stabalizeing and balancing war deccing in our future
I know the game designers on Team Super Friends, SoniClover and Tallest are closely monitoring what's happening with war decs. I can't promise what they'll do with it though (I also have no idea because I haven't been in the office since June). But at least I know they're keeping an eye on how it's working and going. Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8704
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:03:00 -
[108] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Hey since you're buffing the HP on the hulk are you planning on tuning down its mining bonuses? It's getting a minor ice mining buff.
Overall, the Hulk isn't being changed all that much if those (preliminary) numbers from the data dump are to be believed. 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?
|
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1397
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:12:00 -
[109] - Quote
Tippia wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:I'm on Team Super Friends.
We worked on War Dec changes and new modules. We also made new Kill Reports to go with the War Reports that were a part of the War Dec UI.
My team had nothing to do with the unified inventory. Ok. That just means the opaqueness is one layer up GÇö in what team does what and who is on what team. I just got that impression from somewhere, and that may have been wrong, but the general gist of it all is the same.
The broader solution to all this is for people to stop imagining they have a perfect grasp of the minutate of EVE development and holding individual developers personally accountable for development decisions and outcomes. Nobody, from Hellmar and Unifex down, gets to make decisions completely unilaterally, and nobody ever hits a "perfect game" and gets to ship a feature that turns out exactly the way they wanted it to. Making an MMO is a very complex operation with lots of moving parts that have to mesh together very tightly - everything has to be done as a team, and it's never as straightforward as you'd like to hope. |
|
Desert Ice78
Cobra Kai Dojo WHY so Seri0Us
142
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:15:00 -
[110] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Tippia wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:I'm on Team Super Friends.
We worked on War Dec changes and new modules. We also made new Kill Reports to go with the War Reports that were a part of the War Dec UI.
My team had nothing to do with the unified inventory. Ok. That just means the opaqueness is one layer up GÇö in what team does what and who is on what team. I just got that impression from somewhere, and that may have been wrong, but the general gist of it all is the same. The broader solution to all this is for people to stop imagining they have a perfect grasp of the minutate of EVE development and holding individual developers personally accountable for development decisions and outcomes. Nobody, from Hellmar and Unifex down, gets to make decisions completely unilaterally, and nobody ever hits a "perfect game" and gets to ship a feature that turns out exactly the way they wanted it to. Making an MMO is a very complex operation with lots of moving parts that have to mesh together very tightly - everything has to be done as a team, and it's never as straightforward as you'd like to hope.
And sometimes they get it wrong. Terribly, terribly wrong. I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg
CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused. |
|
Cecil Arongo
Gh0st Hunters D3vil's Childr3n
17
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:23:00 -
[111] - Quote
CCP Punkturis: Best Dev, for dealing with all this **** WHILE SHE'S ON VACATION.
Seriously people. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8707
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:26:00 -
[112] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:The broader solution to all this is for people to stop imagining they have a perfect grasp of the minutate of EVE development and holding individual developers personally accountable for development decisions and outcomes. Sure, but I'm not talking so much about the trolling parts, but about who gets asked about what.
What I'm saying is simply that it should come as no surprise if one your most well-known UI devs gets questions about the UI. I'm not defending the blame-game, which would be just as silly even if someone actually managed to pick the exact dev; I'm saying that each of you will be known in very vague terms for being associated with some equally vaguely defined part of the overall work on the game. As a result, you will be addressed with all kinds of queries about this fuzzy collection of game features. Some of it will be BLAAARGH RAGETROLL; some of itGǪ ok, very little of it will not be.
In short, just as much as we shouldn't presume to know who does what, you can't really presume that not working on feature X will mean that you won't be asked about (and, yes, blamed for, when tempers run high) perceived deficiencies in feature X. 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?
|
darmwand
Repo.
61
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:43:00 -
[113] - Quote
Yay, looking forward to the frigates. August will be fun!
Also I'm mildly happy that the Angel ships get a new skin. They finally look as awful as (most of) the Minmatar T2s so I have another reason (other than the price tag) not to fly them
Seriously though, what's with the camouflage? I can't think of a single ship that didn't look better before it got the camo paint job (remember the old Navy Comet?). Your art department obviously has the skills to make things look awesome (as seen on the new Enyo, Claymore etc.), are they running out of ideas? Or is it all a great conspiracy to get us to buy ship paint jobs for AUR?
Anyway. Yay, frigates. darmwand Repossession Agent http://www.repo-corp.net/ Recruitment is OPEN |
Anaphylacti
Catalyst ops Situation: Normal
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:46:00 -
[114] - Quote
Anaphylacti wrote: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!!!
This flame war buried my legitimate question/suggestion T_T so ill post it again.
Can you guys implement a way to save your F# key layouts into the ship fitting so that when I undock all my modules are already grouped and organized the way i like it? |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1384
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:50:00 -
[115] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Hey since you're buffing the HP on the hulk are you planning on tuning down its mining bonuses? It's getting a minor ice mining buff. Overall, the Hulk isn't being changed all that much if those (preliminary) numbers from the data dump are to be believed.
I'd call a 50% increase in overall hitpoints (an 80% increase in shield HP) pretty significant. You're talking about /14k EHP/ with all 5s and no hardeners. a rogue goon |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2789
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:51:00 -
[116] - Quote
Anaphylacti wrote:Anaphylacti wrote: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!!! This flame war buried my legitimate question/suggestion T_T so ill post it again. Can you guys implement a way to save your F# key layouts into the ship fitting so that when I undock all my modules are already grouped and organized the way i like it?
This is a really great idea and I know a lot of people would like the grouping to be saved to but it's unfortunately not possible to add this for the August release since it's a bigger issue than what we're doing.
I will see what my deskbro Tuxford says about it though (when he gets back from vacation, he won't be back until sometime after I get back), maybe we can do something about it later Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Hustomte
The Scope
77
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:52:00 -
[117] - Quote
Anaphylacti wrote: Can you guys implement a way to save your F# key layouts into the ship fitting so that when I undock all my modules are already grouped and organized the way i like it?
You can already group your guns before undocking, simply hold shift and drag the module over the other one and a (1) will appear under it (for group one). As for F#, yeah that will need to be worked on, but at least you can undock grouped up and ready to go ...Signature... |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8710
|
Posted - 2012.07.23 23:57:00 -
[118] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:I'd call a 50% increase in overall hitpoints (an 80% increase in shield HP) pretty significant. You're talking about /14k EHP/ with all 5s and no hardeners. Nah. It's getting a free MSEII and an 800-plate. The miners will happily forego the opportunity to make use of and enhance these protective measures, just like they do now. Then they'll complain that they still manage to get themselves blown up by destroyers and demand that they be able to fit LSEs and 1600s.
I'm calling it GÇ£not significantGÇ¥ because it's just ~3-4k EHP more, which is easy to compensate for and because it will only really help those who already are safe. 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?
|
Knug LiDi
N00bFleeT Numquam Ambulare Solus
62
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 00:22:00 -
[119] - Quote
I can handle space camo.
But why so much dark metal ? The ships have wonderful layers of detail, why hide it by making it all so black?
The models are too damn dark.
For those folks that automatically link black with 'cool' you're missing the point
If only we could fall into a woman's arms
without falling into her hands |
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
243
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 00:32:00 -
[120] - Quote
Lettuce Prey wrote:ON THE UI INVENTORY THING maybe the devs know something that we the players don't know about this new setup. maybe they thought we would just figure it out on our own and we would see that this new way of doing the inventory is MUCH better than the old way. much better. that means that my problem with it is that i have not given it enough thought at finding this new and easy method of using this newer and easier inventory screen. maybe i am just not smart enough. so i'll just ask the question. how is this new inventory setup better than the old one?
It's not. If it was, people would know by now. It's barely passable for the simplest tasks, but you can't get around the fact that the induced lag and the removal of much used functionality makes it worse and less efficient. A single window inventory system? What kind of drugs where you people on when you thought that was anything BUT a dumb idea?
Give us back our hangar buttons. Give us back bays in our right click menus. Give me a ******* box I can check so everything opens in new windows! problem mostly solved :)
Go ahead and keep the inventory button for folks who want to play with a tree, but that button will come right off my neocom as soon as the hangar buttons return.
Quote: 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).
The unified inventory is a part of the User Interface, and almost ALL bitching about the user interface right now is in regards to the unified inventory, so almost any UI update that isn't some sort of bug fix is assumed to mean you're fixing the Unified Inventory.
Anyways, someone other than punkturis here said they basically ignored all our feedback on the Unified Inventory because they felt all the negative comments (which, coincidentally, was almost ALL the comments on it during it's time on the test server) were more about people not giving it a chance, and not actual feedback. Way to go CCP Optimal. And no, I'm never going to let you live that down, because frankly, **** you too.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1376279#post1376279
Quote: 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..
Actually, yes, you did outright tell us you didn't believe our feedback because we're too stupid to provide honest feedback. Comment linked above, assuming I'm not too incompetent to link. Well, not YOU, but CCP Optimal.
I just want my damn inventory to work again :( |
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1386
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 00:44:00 -
[121] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:I'd call a 50% increase in overall hitpoints (an 80% increase in shield HP) pretty significant. You're talking about /14k EHP/ with all 5s and no hardeners. Nah. It's getting a free MSEII and an 800-plate. The miners will happily forego the opportunity to make use of and enhance these protective measures, just like they do now. Then they'll complain that they still manage to get themselves blown up by destroyers and demand that they be able to fit LSEs and 1600s. I'm calling it GÇ£not significantGÇ¥ because it's just ~3-4k EHP more, which is easy to compensate for and because it will only really help those who already are safe.
Actually, from running the numbers, it seems you need a Brutix to kill one in 0.5 space. a rogue goon |
mkint
811
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 01:17:00 -
[122] - Quote
Dinta Zembo wrote:, Punkturis said something like "people are afraid of change, that'll go away once people get used to the changes."
This might be true when talking about putting on a new pair of socks, but not about UI.
The UI in any system has one, and only one job: to optimize workflow. Making significantly drastic changes to workflow puts the user in a position where even a veteran is back to square one with the newest rookie. That is bad. Period.
With other software platforms, that's where the user has the best opportunity to say "Do I still want to be this company's customer, when they keep breaking my workflow?" And the answer can just as easily be "no" as "yes."
That said, I can't say CCP has ever made an actual improvement in workflow. At best they've broken even, at worse, there are large swathes of the game I won't even touch, even after UI "improvements" and often because of them. It sucks that you can't just boycott inventory like you can PI or POSes, or corp management. Well, I guess there's one way. |
Hustomte
The Scope
77
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 01:28:00 -
[123] - Quote
mkint wrote: The new UI broke all my bots and now I have a sad
fixed it for you ...Signature... |
Aphoxema G
CTRL-Q Iron Oxide.
310
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 01:45:00 -
[124] - Quote
I like the new inventory, but that's because I work a certain way and I'm not a person who uses the inventory a whole lot. I can fully understand why someone else would abhor it. It's a wonderful, beautiful option for me, but it needs to remain an -option- for the people who can't get comfortable with it. Changes that focus on better decision making rather than better computers and connections. [ http://tinyurl.com/czwxolr-á] Identify "North" [ http://tinyurl.com/7kubllo ] |
Noriko Mai
520
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 01:49:00 -
[125] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Believe it or not, but we are people just like you. I'm praying to the Lords of EVE every time before I go to bed and you tell me only now that you are normal people... Just like me and all the others... and... but... ehm...
|
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
576
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 02:12:00 -
[126] - Quote
CCP, why does everyone want miners to pvp?
No one has told them, that yes combat ships do fit tanks, but they can also have great dps at the same time. They never have to sacrfice dps for tank. (Though armor does have to sacrifice speed for tank, and they do complain about that.)
You guys seem to not mind people getting angry at you. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Endymi Typhirr
24
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 02:46:00 -
[127] - Quote
Why don't we just paint every ship in camo and be done with it?
I disapprove of space camo, and so should you! Concord LP Channel and Mailing List For buying and selling of Concord LP and related items |
SamuelCZ90
Bohemian Veterans Hedonistic Imperative
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 03:13:00 -
[128] - Quote
LoRDa RaMOs wrote: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. Please quit it. Already. I'd like to point the devs (again) to these wonderful suggestions from he community: Dual pane inventory FTW! http://i.imgur.com/j8Jyn.jpgA good list of stuff https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1239629#post1239629Something unrelated to the UI for a change https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1649019#post1649019And the commend about angel cow ships... Awesome.! Maybe it's time for some extra love on the UI again.
That dual panel inventory idea looks very good. Ill hope there will be something like that.
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1388
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 03:25:00 -
[129] - Quote
rodyas wrote:CCP, why does everyone want miners to pvp?
No one has told them, that yes combat ships do fit tanks, but they can also have great dps at the same time. They never have to sacrfice dps for tank. (Though armor does have to sacrifice speed for tank, and they do complain about that.)
You guys seem to not mind people getting angry at you.
heh you're actually wrong here because combat ships do have to pick some balance between damage and tank
what you want is a max-yield hulk with 80k ehp a rogue goon |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
4054
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 04:10:00 -
[130] - Quote
In the far future they'll let you build your fittings without having the items on hand already and its F key layout and group like EFT except, its built in.
|
|
Vanessa Vansen
Cybermana
42
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 04:21:00 -
[131] - Quote
Please don't forget to adjust the fitting requirements of ice harvesters to be inline with strip miners. This would allow switching from strip miners to ice harvesters (+ upgrades) without having to change the non-mining/non-harvesting related stuff (e.g. tank, cargohold and so on) |
Juniorama
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 04:33:00 -
[132] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Erzak Ormand wrote:I personally enjoy the new Inventory system. I keeps me from having to open 10 different windows. The old inventory system kept me from having to open 10 different windows. At no point would I ever need (or even be able to, without additional work) to open more than four. The new UI forces me to open more windows than ever. I suppose I could contain it in one window, but that would make it four times slower (excluding UI lag) than before. Either way, not enjoyable. The fix that made some (but not all) windows remember (some of) their status fixed (some of) the annoyances, but still requires a ton of setup to make work and I dread the day a mistake or a patch resets the window settings. In a funny twist of irony, the new main UI window is now the one that is the least reliable in this regard. The old way where all windows remembered all of their status without any of the annoyances was still preferable.
Seems to me that people don't know you can drag items from one inventory location to another inventory location through the inventory tree (just drop it on the name of the location you want your items to go).
I don't see a reason to have more than one window open at a time. |
darmwand
Repo.
61
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 04:34:00 -
[133] - Quote
rodyas wrote:CCP, why does everyone want miners to pvp? No one has told them, that yes combat ships do fit tanks, but they can also have great dps at the same time. They never have to sacrfice dps for tank. (Though armor does have to sacrifice speed for tank, and they do complain about that.)
Huh? Every slot that is used for tank reduces DPS, especially low and rig slots. Eg. a DCU takes up a slot that could be given to a Magstab, the same thing goes for plates and other armor modules.
Finding the right balance between DPS and tank is an important part of fitting a PvP ship, just as finding the right balance between x and tank is an important part of pretty much every other ship in EVE (like haulers with cargo space, mining ships with mining yield etc.). darmwand Repossession Agent http://www.repo-corp.net/ Recruitment is OPEN |
Sten Biller
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 04:38:00 -
[134] - Quote
Panhead4411 wrote:Why sooo black? I'm tired of seeing all my favorite ships getting re-textured to look like they were drug through poo or dipped in old motor oil. I think so also; I feel I need to turn up my Gamma since all the changes the last few years, but Eve won't allow that.
|
Anvil44
Independent Traders and Builders MPA
99
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 05:03:00 -
[135] - Quote
Juniorama wrote:Tippia wrote:Erzak Ormand wrote:I personally enjoy the new Inventory system. I keeps me from having to open 10 different windows. The old inventory system kept me from having to open 10 different windows. At no point would I ever need (or even be able to, without additional work) to open more than four. The new UI forces me to open more windows than ever. I suppose I could contain it in one window, but that would make it four times slower (excluding UI lag) than before. Either way, not enjoyable. The fix that made some (but not all) windows remember (some of) their status fixed (some of) the annoyances, but still requires a ton of setup to make work and I dread the day a mistake or a patch resets the window settings. In a funny twist of irony, the new main UI window is now the one that is the least reliable in this regard. The old way where all windows remembered all of their status without any of the annoyances was still preferable. Seems to me that people don't know you can drag items from one inventory location to another inventory location through the inventory tree (just drop it on the name of the location you want your items to go). I don't see a reason to have more than one window open at a time. Obviously you haven't used this window while in a POS while trying to move cargo from your orca into a hanger. Or from a container to some other location. I can't always expand my tree view large enough to see both source and target.
Another annoyance is to undock from a station without closing your cargo view and the hanger items view, then redock only to find both windows open and showing your cargo contents. I hate trying to drag and drop nothing a few times before I realize what is going on.
I really like the direction they seem to be heading with the changes to the mining vessels. Each one, whether tech1 or t2 will have a clearly defined role. They all become useful, not just 2 ships out of 6.
I have no excitement for the new shader models since I can't really see much anhow. Too dark. Just like real space I suppose. I may not like you or your point of view but you have a right to voice it. |
Diamonica Norya
University of Caille Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 06:29:00 -
[136] - Quote
I believe the Eve ship artists plays D3 and pitied the absence of the Cow Level and decided to create a New Eden version in memory of it.
The Angel Cartel shall now be named as The Cow Cartel starting August 8th 2012 and bring Cow Horror to the remaining places in New Eden that aren't affected by Sansha Incursions. Unleash the Bovines! |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
577
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 06:32:00 -
[137] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:rodyas wrote:CCP, why does everyone want miners to pvp?
No one has told them, that yes combat ships do fit tanks, but they can also have great dps at the same time. They never have to sacrfice dps for tank. (Though armor does have to sacrifice speed for tank, and they do complain about that.)
You guys seem to not mind people getting angry at you. heh you're actually wrong here because combat ships do have to pick some balance between damage and tank what you want is a max-yield hulk with 80k ehp
True, but I imagine you don't fly gallente, when you go out. With some races, having to "balance" isn't too bad really. Mostly mining barges are like flying gallente or the non-flavor of the month. I don't need 80k ehp or max-yeild ( just kidding, I do want max yeild) but I would like minmitar version miners, or perhaps drake or tengu like mining barges. That or nerf all those great pvp ships. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Diamonica Norya
University of Caille Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 06:33:00 -
[138] - Quote
Anvil44 wrote:Juniorama wrote:Tippia wrote:Erzak Ormand wrote:I personally enjoy the new Inventory system. I keeps me from having to open 10 different windows. The old inventory system kept me from having to open 10 different windows. At no point would I ever need (or even be able to, without additional work) to open more than four. The new UI forces me to open more windows than ever. I suppose I could contain it in one window, but that would make it four times slower (excluding UI lag) than before. Either way, not enjoyable. The fix that made some (but not all) windows remember (some of) their status fixed (some of) the annoyances, but still requires a ton of setup to make work and I dread the day a mistake or a patch resets the window settings. In a funny twist of irony, the new main UI window is now the one that is the least reliable in this regard. The old way where all windows remembered all of their status without any of the annoyances was still preferable. Seems to me that people don't know you can drag items from one inventory location to another inventory location through the inventory tree (just drop it on the name of the location you want your items to go). I don't see a reason to have more than one window open at a time. Obviously you haven't used this window while in a POS while trying to move cargo from your orca into a hanger. Or from a container to some other location. I can't always expand my tree view large enough to see both source and target. Another annoyance is to undock from a station without closing your cargo view and the hanger items view, then redock only to find both windows open and showing your cargo contents. I hate trying to drag and drop nothing a few times before I realize what is going on. I really like the direction they seem to be heading with the changes to the mining vessels. Each one, whether tech1 or t2 will have a clearly defined role. They all become useful, not just 2 ships out of 6. I have no excitement for the new shader models since I can't really see much anhow. Too dark. Just like real space I suppose.
ppl just needed to learn to trim the tree or not let their tree grow at all, then you'll love the new inventory
how you achieved that is entirely another matter but generally has something to do with quite some adjustments to your play style and activeness in game are currently the most effective methods. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1681
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 08:33:00 -
[139] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:Also we would like to draw your attention to the new video V3 shader for Angel ships here.
Why so camo? Camouflage everywhere displacing our rust and duct tape does not feel right! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
xXThunder StruckXx
Shadows of Uranus
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 08:43:00 -
[140] - Quote
Could you please let us know what is happening to the crimewatch changes? Have they been scrapped , withheld again?
Any update would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you. |
|
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
177
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 09:34:00 -
[141] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:Thanks for filling in the rest of the story, Punkturis. Maybe the rest of the Dev's will get a clue about proactively engaging with us instead of ignoring us and hoping for the best (which rarely has happened over the past two years). Most devs at CCP read the forums very actively and diligently, and incorporate the feedback in their work. But some are not responding as actively on the forums (or on Twitter) because they are not willing to endure at times the kind of beating CCP Punkturis has been subject to here. Don't quote out of context, don't assume that dev X has worked on feature Y, don't resort to personal attacks, be nice. Believe it or not, but we are people just like you.
In my opinion, as human beings you guys have every right to counter-troll the living hell out those types, blue tag and all.
F**k "professionalism." Most of us just like seeing you guys post, whatever it happens to be.
EDIT: On topic, good job with the new tutorial. Seriously. Occasionally plays sober |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1403
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 09:46:00 -
[142] - Quote
xXThunder StruckXx wrote:Could you please let us know what is happening to the crimewatch changes? Have they been scrapped , withheld again?
Any update would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
Still in ongoing development, we were never expecting to ship any additional changes in this release. |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1682
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 10:06:00 -
[143] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:I was sort of making a joke of the first person who mentioned me that only quoted half of what I said in the interview.. I also made sure to make it really obvious that I was just quoting part of what he said (by cutting on a ( and pretty much mentioning it)
Undying love and support for CCP Punkturis!
Have a nice vacation, you deserve it! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1682
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 10:09:00 -
[144] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Tippia wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Hey since you're buffing the HP on the hulk are you planning on tuning down its mining bonuses? It's getting a minor ice mining buff. Overall, the Hulk isn't being changed all that much if those (preliminary) numbers from the data dump are to be believed. I'd call a 50% increase in overall hitpoints (an 80% increase in shield HP) pretty significant. You're talking about /14k EHP/ with all 5s and no hardeners.
Maybe it's the answer to increasing catalyst DPS so much and creating and alpha-nadoes / Talos etc. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1682
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 10:18:00 -
[145] - Quote
darmwand wrote:rodyas wrote:CCP, why does everyone want miners to pvp? No one has told them, that yes combat ships do fit tanks, but they can also have great dps at the same time. They never have to sacrfice dps for tank. (Though armor does have to sacrifice speed for tank, and they do complain about that.)
Huh? Every slot that is used for tank reduces DPS, especially low and rig slots. Eg. a DCU takes up a slot that could be given to a Magstab, the same thing goes for plates and other armor modules. Finding the right balance between DPS and tank is an important part of fitting a PvP ship, just as finding the right balance between x and tank is an important part of pretty much every other ship in EVE (like haulers with cargo space, mining ships with mining yield etc.).
You can still choose: "will I put in here another gyrostab or a plate or a DC or an EANM or whatever?" "Will I got max shield buffer / max resists / booster (for bonused ships) etc? "Will I go nano setup? Long range arty? Brawler?"
With a mining ship you can chose to have *passable* tank OR yield OR cargo, the slots and CPU / PG are so few you can't experiment with bits here and there. Most of all, any passable tank choice means heavily forfeiting the other two, too much black and white.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Rattus Norwegius
15
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 10:24:00 -
[146] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:
The broader solution to all this is for people to stop imagining they have a perfect grasp of the minutate of EVE development and holding individual developers personally accountable for development decisions and outcomes. Nobody, from Hellmar and Unifex down, gets to make decisions completely unilaterally, and nobody ever hits a "perfect game" and gets to ship a feature that turns out exactly the way they wanted it to. Making an MMO is a very complex operation with lots of moving parts that have to mesh together very tightly - everything has to be done as a team, and it's never as straightforward as you'd like to hope.
[/quote]
Right. So we are not to ask questions or provide feedback to devs that do not work on a particular issue.
We are also not allowed to make any assumptions about which devs are working on a particular issue, and CCP is generally less than transparent on these issues. (see quote)
Message received loud and clear: "We do not want any questions and feedback, unless it is praise".
It sure fits with the last couple of months experience..
(Except for CCP karkur. She does an awesome job, both with features and communication) |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1403
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 10:42:00 -
[147] - Quote
Rattus Norwegius wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:
The broader solution to all this is for people to stop imagining they have a perfect grasp of the minutate of EVE development and holding individual developers personally accountable for development decisions and outcomes. Nobody, from Hellmar and Unifex down, gets to make decisions completely unilaterally, and nobody ever hits a "perfect game" and gets to ship a feature that turns out exactly the way they wanted it to. Making an MMO is a very complex operation with lots of moving parts that have to mesh together very tightly - everything has to be done as a team, and it's never as straightforward as you'd like to hope.
Right. So we are not to ask questions or provide feedback to devs that do not work on a particular issue. We are also not allowed to make any assumptions about which devs are working on a particular issue, and CCP is generally less than transparent on these issues. (see quote) Message received loud and clear: "We do not want any questions and feedback, unless it is praise". It sure fits with the last couple of months experience.. (Except for CCP karkur. She does an awesome job, both with features and communication)
Go look up "accountable" in the dictionary and then re-read my post with your new-found knowledge (paying attention to the words "individual" and "personally" in the context given). |
|
Rattus Norwegius
15
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 11:04:00 -
[148] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Go look up "accountable" in the dictionary and then re-read my post with your new-found knowledge (paying attention to the words "individual" and "personally" in the context given).
I know what accounable mean. Do you know what "question" and "feedback" means?
You seem to view us as you enemies, out to get your head. I don't want to hurt CCP, or any of its staff, I want to help to make the game better. To do this, we provide feedback on features and procedures. We also ask questions, to see if our feedback have been understood, agreed with or disagred with, or wheather features/fixes are being worked on.
I'm sorry that you find this such a horrible thing. |
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
437
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 11:25:00 -
[149] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:
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.
Sadly, yes she did say that.
It pretty much sums up CCP's attitude lately.
|
GeeShizzle MacCloud
146
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 11:27:00 -
[150] - Quote
Rattus Norwegius wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:
Go look up "accountable" in the dictionary and then re-read my post with your new-found knowledge (paying attention to the words "individual" and "personally" in the context given).
I know what accounable mean. Do you know what "question" and "feedback" means? You seem to view us as you enemies, out to get your head. I don't want to hurt CCP, or any of its staff, I want to help to make the game better. To do this, we provide feedback on features and procedures. We also ask questions, to see if our feedback have been understood, agreed with or disagred with, or wheather features/fixes are being worked on. I'm sorry that you find this such a horrible thing.
Greyscale plz dont take the trolls bait! its soo obvious! |
|
Gainard
Eurotech Industries
65
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 11:43:00 -
[151] - Quote
Here we go again. 1. Fix old crap before you introduce new crap. Serving old whine in new threads: Unified inventory complaints went largely ignored by CCP (I know, not totally), don't be surprised it keeps comming back. If it was better than the old system it would die - but it is not.**** is ****, even if billions of flies eat it - I am not a fly. Main complaints in short: Clunky handling, wasted real estate on screen (item count, approx prize (mostly useless due to unpredictable difference between price shown and actual prrices -suggestions on how to fix ignored too), links and right click entries removed (Orca, capitals, items hangar, ship hangar...), Ship cargiohold not loading when logging in, lag when loading etc, etc. Suggestions on how to improve it or requests to roll it back until it is improved, tested and approved upon by players on sisi completely ignored. Unified inventory NOT available on assets where it actually makes sense. 2. Fixing required (PERSONAL choice, lots of others available, read the relevant threads): Invention requiring a dozen+ clicks. Add at least an repeat button.... ...I'd even take it if i still have to select a production line and click OK again, but that should be all I have to do, not start all over again. 3. The 3 page slide show on the 1.2 features is a joke, waste of link. It simply offers not enough information.
Not in the mood for real raging, did enough on the Unified inventory to last me a lifetime. Subscription still running out in December.
For UI look up FUBAR on Google. For EVE see SNAFU. url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_slang_terms |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1392
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 11:44:00 -
[152] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Tippia wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Hey since you're buffing the HP on the hulk are you planning on tuning down its mining bonuses? It's getting a minor ice mining buff. Overall, the Hulk isn't being changed all that much if those (preliminary) numbers from the data dump are to be believed. I'd call a 50% increase in overall hitpoints (an 80% increase in shield HP) pretty significant. You're talking about /14k EHP/ with all 5s and no hardeners. Maybe it's the answer to increasing catalyst DPS so much and creating and alpha-nadoes / Talos etc.
No, those things were the answer to the removal of insurance from concord kills. It's obvious what the goal here is. a rogue goon |
Siyis Rholh
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 11:48:00 -
[153] - Quote
The inferno feature pages are so useless. Every time I go to them (I'm a slow learner, ok) I automatically assume I should click on them for more info... but there isn't any, just another feature page with a picture mildly relevant to the topic and a one sentence article telling us what we already knew from what the link said.
Add more info to them or scrap them because as they are know any 5 minutes spent making a "feature" page is 5 minutes wasted.
If you can't take the time to add info yourself, at least throw in some links to the work people in the community have done, like image galleries for the new Angel ships or datamined ship changes. |
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
437
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 11:51:00 -
[154] - Quote
Endymi Typhirr wrote:Why don't we just paint every ship in camo and be done with it?
I disapprove of space camo, and so should you!
Looks like they are on the way to that, and at the same time diluting any colour the ships had into a dark drab blob. |
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
437
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 11:54:00 -
[155] - Quote
Juniorama wrote:Tippia wrote:Erzak Ormand wrote:I personally enjoy the new Inventory system. I keeps me from having to open 10 different windows. The old inventory system kept me from having to open 10 different windows. At no point would I ever need (or even be able to, without additional work) to open more than four. The new UI forces me to open more windows than ever. I suppose I could contain it in one window, but that would make it four times slower (excluding UI lag) than before. Either way, not enjoyable. The fix that made some (but not all) windows remember (some of) their status fixed (some of) the annoyances, but still requires a ton of setup to make work and I dread the day a mistake or a patch resets the window settings. In a funny twist of irony, the new main UI window is now the one that is the least reliable in this regard. The old way where all windows remembered all of their status without any of the annoyances was still preferable. Seems to me that people don't know you can drag items from one inventory location to another inventory location through the inventory tree (just drop it on the name of the location you want your items to go). I don't see a reason to have more than one window open at a time.
Ummmmm, ever thought that people may want to see what is in more than one window at a time, to check contents etc, move things between a few windows without having to open/close the dopey tree thing all the time ? |
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
437
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 11:59:00 -
[156] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Rattus Norwegius wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:
The broader solution to all this is for people to stop imagining they have a perfect grasp of the minutate of EVE development and holding individual developers personally accountable for development decisions and outcomes. Nobody, from Hellmar and Unifex down, gets to make decisions completely unilaterally, and nobody ever hits a "perfect game" and gets to ship a feature that turns out exactly the way they wanted it to. Making an MMO is a very complex operation with lots of moving parts that have to mesh together very tightly - everything has to be done as a team, and it's never as straightforward as you'd like to hope.
Right. So we are not to ask questions or provide feedback to devs that do not work on a particular issue. We are also not allowed to make any assumptions about which devs are working on a particular issue, and CCP is generally less than transparent on these issues. (see quote) Message received loud and clear: "We do not want any questions and feedback, unless it is praise". It sure fits with the last couple of months experience.. (Except for CCP karkur. She does an awesome job, both with features and communication) Go look up "accountable" in the dictionary and then re-read my post with your new-found knowledge (paying attention to the words "individual" and "personally" in the context given).
Go look up "condescending" in the dictionary and see if that applies to your above comment |
Zhentar
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
16
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 12:16:00 -
[157] - Quote
Rommiee wrote: Ummmmm, ever thought that people may want to see what is in more than one window at a time, to check contents etc, move things between a few windows without having to open/close the dopey tree thing all the time ?
The shift button. Use it. |
Zhentar
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
16
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 12:19:00 -
[158] - Quote
Rattus Norwegius wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:
Go look up "accountable" in the dictionary and then re-read my post with your new-found knowledge (paying attention to the words "individual" and "personally" in the context given).
I know what accounable mean. Do you know what "question" and "feedback" means? You seem to view us as you enemies, out to get your head. I don't want to hurt CCP, or any of its staff, I want to help to make the game better. To do this, we provide feedback on features and procedures. We also ask questions, to see if our feedback have been understood, agreed with or disagred with, or wheather features/fixes are being worked on. I'm sorry that you find this such a horrible thing.
There is a distinct difference between 'question's and 'feedback', and what this thread devolved into at about page 4. |
Tess La'Coil
Lightbringer's Sanctuary
25
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 12:26:00 -
[159] - Quote
Just gotta swing this little link in here and hope to get it fixed/done before 1.2
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=131414&find=unread Someone once said I was a muppet. If that's so, I'm quite sure the Swedish Chef is my brother.-á |
Rattus Norwegius
16
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 12:57:00 -
[160] - Quote
Zhentar wrote:
There is a distinct difference between 'question's and 'feedback', and what this thread devolved into at about page 4.
Up to page 3 or so people were asking questions about the conspicuous absence of any mention of Unified Inventory changes, and providing feedback that the UI was still bad/good.(both views were presented).
Then someone, attempting an answer,incorrectly attributed a comment by CCP Punkturis to this topic.
This was cleared up a couple of posts later.
Further questions about the Unified Inventory was then posed, with requests of an update from CCP.
I did not read this as people demanding CCP Punkturis should answer these, rather that CCP should provide an answer, but I can see how she could have felt that way.
Incidentally, I do not feel it is particularly odd to assume that someone working on the user interface would be able to answer questions about a user interface feature/problem, even if the dev in question were not him/herself working on it. The user interface need to be consistent and coherent across all features: When I rightclick, I have certain expectations of what will happen, regardless of whether I do PI, PvP or production. They should talk together. All related devs should have a general idea of what other devs in related fields are working on, or towards. In the past, they have been willing to answer questions they knew the answer to.
Now, CCP Punkturis is on vacation, which means that we should make no demands of her, she is her on her own time. Also, being out of the office naturally means she is out of the loop on current developments. I feel Punkturis is perfectly right in making this clear; I have no complaints about her posting.
Someone in CCP should tell us whether we can expect any improvements to the Uni.Inv. soon though, and what they are working towards. Paging CCP Soundwave?
|
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
781
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 13:03:00 -
[161] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Believe it or not, but we are people just like you. I'm praying to the Lords of EVE every time before I go to bed and you tell me only now that you are normal people... Just like me and all the others... and... but... ehm... We are like Greek gods, come to Fanfest 2013 and we'll demonstrate. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Software Director | EVE Online, CCP Games | Follow on: Twitter / Google+ |
|
Makari Aeron
The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium
20
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 13:07:00 -
[162] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Noriko Mai wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Believe it or not, but we are people just like you. I'm praying to the Lords of EVE every time before I go to bed and you tell me only now that you are normal people... Just like me and all the others... and... but... ehm... We are like Greek gods, come to Fanfest 2013 and we'll demonstrate.
Who on the team is Dionysus? And do we get free alcohol from him or her? Pew Pew Pew! |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
781
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 13:07:00 -
[163] - Quote
Rattus Norwegius wrote:Someone in CCP should tell us whether we can expect any improvements to the Uni.Inv. soon though, and what they are working towards. Paging CCP Soundwave? We'll draw his attention to this thread. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Software Director | EVE Online, CCP Games | Follow on: Twitter / Google+ |
|
fantazmythe
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
15
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 13:23:00 -
[164] - Quote
come on guys stop putting **** on the dev's . as they say there only human and they sometimes make mistakes. i for one absolutely appreciate all the hard work there doing.
you all seem to forget that mistakes or no THEY WORK HARD and should be respected for such.
i personally would like to thank the devs for making eve more awesome each time and doing their best to fix mistakes instead of just sweeping them under the rug like other game dev's do (refering to non CCP game devs).
P.S at least you have dev's actually replying to you. go to other games and see if the same things happen |
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
161
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 13:50:00 -
[165] - Quote
fantazmythe wrote: i personally would like to thank the devs for making eve more awesome each time and doing their best to fix mistakes instead of just sweeping them under the rug like other game dev's do (referring to non CCP game devs).
This would count for something if they had actually kept their word on "weekly updates until this is FIXED"....b/c they haven't done anything in nearly a month...or even spoken about any changes to inventory for that matter.
Thats why we are bugging them, to make sure they do not come under the false assumption a second time that this inventory blunder is perfectly fine and ready to live life as an adult. B/c as it stands, it is not a finished and polish product, it is still broken in many ways, and the ones who should know things about it seem to be ignoring the player base through complete lack of shown interest.
Also, i find it odd that the main dev to respond to any of this thread is THE ONE ON VACATION!!!!!! Does that not seem odd to anybody else?
To Punkturis, you rock, and we are sorry if we offended you, we just wish your fellow Dev's had the same attitude of keeping in touch with the player base.
And to the Dev that said something to the effect the reason more dev's don't respond is something to do w/ the trolling? Well again, guess who caused this mess, grow a pair and own up to the ppl you (dev's involved with this mess) ignored...you can start this by...getting involved with the conversation.
http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing -á-á < Unified Inventory is NOT ready... |
fantazmythe
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
15
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 13:58:00 -
[166] - Quote
except most the stuff im reading has very little construct beyond ***** winge wine slander winge. maybe if your posts were more constructive and less flaming/raging they would respond more, also as they have said quite a few are on vacation, that most likely would put pause to the unified inventory fixes.
just show some respect and make your posts more constructive and perhaps you will get more responses. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8723
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 14:46:00 -
[167] - Quote
Juniorama wrote:Seems to me that people don't know you can drag items from one inventory location to another inventory location through the inventory tree (just drop it on the name of the location you want your items to go). Seems to me that the only ones who think the UI is even remotely fine are those who don't use it really make full use of it GÇö people who have no idea what the problems are and through ignorance therefore prefer to assume that everyone else is stupid rather than to look into what the actual issues are.
We know this. It doesn't solve anything. In fact, with the spring-loaded folder, it tends to make things worse since you accidentally navigate away from the view you're interested in and now have to find your way back to it, which needlessly adds time. In addition, the UI doesn't even implement what you describe correctly. There is no GÇ£hold to scrollGÇ¥ functionality GÇö if I grab an item, I can no longer manipulate the tree view, so I have to do that manipulation before-hand, which adds even more needless busywork for something that should happen automatically. If they were going to go with that kind of navigational style they need to actually implement the functionality that makes it work.
Quote:I don't see a reason to have more than one window open at a time. GǪand that pretty much proves the point in my first paragraph.
You have more than one window open at a time to see more than one location at a time, of course. It's the same reason why file managers are moving away from the 1980s-style tree view + file view and into dual views, and it's the same reason people have multiple windows open when they manipulate files using those obsolete file managers. Even with dual views, a lot of them are also implementing things like drop stacks to have a third mini-buffer of stuff that will be remembered and held between the two (or more) views already available.
If you don't see a reason for more than one window you have 1) never organised any larger-size library of stuff; 2) never had transfer stuff between a local and a remote location; 3) never compared two things; 4) never partially mixed/merged two things together; 5) and just in general lived a very very strange and disorganised life.
Diamonica Norya wrote:ppl just needed to learn to trim the tree or not let their tree grow at all, then you'll love the new inventory Then the UI has fundamentally failed. If it cannot support the stuff that it's actually meant to facilitate, then it is completely without purpose and can safely be removed. 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?
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8723
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 14:52:00 -
[168] - Quote
fantazmythe wrote:just show some respect and make your posts more constructive and perhaps you will get more responses. We tried that in the many many (many) feedback threads before the UI went live. It didn't have much effect, since the thing was pushed onto the live servers with every last flaw left untouched, requiring weeks of patching to even get into a semblance of a working stateGǪ oh, and of course, there were the dismissive answers about how that constructive feedback probably didn't mean anything.
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?
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
358
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 15:00:00 -
[169] - Quote
Boooriiing |
Xadron
Century Mining Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 15:11:00 -
[170] - Quote
Wait, if http://pastebin.com/frBc2muR is right, and my math is right, the mack is gonna be slower on ice, due to the nerf of the ice multiplyer, in fact if i understand this correctly, the hulk will be the "new mack" and the mack will have a 10% supremacy compared to the hulk in terms of actual ore yield ?!
Am i doing my math right?
If so, and these stats are the final once, im gonna HATE doing ice mining i fear.. |
|
Sable Lowell
The 20th Legion Mildly Sober
4
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 15:19:00 -
[171] - Quote
What a disappointing patch. Go back and fix the UI before adding more unnecessary crap to the game. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8724
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 15:20:00 -
[172] - Quote
Xadron wrote:Wait, if http://pastebin.com/frBc2muR is right, and my math is right, the mack is gonna be slower on ice, due to the nerf of the ice multiplyer, in fact if i understand this correctly, the hulk will be the "new mack" and the mack will have a 10% supremacy compared to the hulk in terms of actual ore yield ?! Am i doing my math right? You're doing something odd with the maths, but I don't know what. I'd venture to guess that you've overestimated the value of the role bonuses.
The Hulk will be the best ship for yield, for all mine:ables. The basic thing to remember when comparing the new ships is that, with the role bonuses included, all of them effectively have three strip/ice miners. From there on, all you need to do is compare the skill bonuses, and the Hulk's are higher: +15% base +3% per exhumer level, compared to the Mack (and Skiff), which only gets +1% per exhumer level. 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?
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1395
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 15:24:00 -
[173] - Quote
Yes the goal is for you to be able to safely "AFK" mine in 0.5 in an untanked Hulk and never worry about anything blowing you up because CCP will re-prioritize everything to nerf suicide ganking for the nth time a rogue goon |
Astroyka
Mirkur Draug'Tyr Defiant Legacy
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 15:38:00 -
[174] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:EVE Online: Inferno 1.2 will be deployed on Wednesday, August 8
Do you mean August 25? Or are we in a parallel universe and we already have the update?
|
Wiu Ming
Dead Guy Syndicate
4
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 15:41:00 -
[175] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Steijn wrote:What about the UI? What improvements are you making to the fail inventory system you have forced upon us? or are we just supposed to STFU and lump it? Seriously tired of double shift clicking - service a POS or Pi CCP and see how you like it.
The new UI blows because we lost functionality. It's fine for those who can't seem to do more than one thing at a time, but for those of us who can and prefer to multitask, it's f**king Hell. Just give back the functionality that lets us multitask effectively.
- Add a button in the ESC menu that says "don't reuse windows!" - Give us our right-click menus back, specifically: capitals, whether in space or docked, should be able to right-click open Cargo, Corp Hangar, Drone Bay, Fuel Bay. Evidently pos management has similar issues. - Give us our double-click to open cargo bays back (in a separate window!). How often do you change ships vs. open a cargo bay? It was perfect the way it was: double-click to open cargo, right-click menu to activate a different ship.
For devs who still don't get it, check out Clive Thompson's article in this month's Wired. There are parallels galore, but the tl;dr is a gazillion open windows makes managing assets far easier. And in Eve, you're constantly managing assets.
The old system worked perfectly in most respects. Feel free to clean things up behind the scenes, but give us our "visual chaos" back!! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8724
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 15:43:00 -
[176] - Quote
Astroyka wrote:Do you mean August 25? Or are we in a parallel universe and we already have the update? No, we're in this universe where your summer hibernation hasn't lasted as long as you thinkGǪ
8th fo August is two weeks away.
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?
|
VLAD VIRONS
X-SENSE Security
23
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 15:54:00 -
[177] - Quote
ah yea about Inventory guys, its almost ok but there still several bugs u might look into, like now if i want to open ship's cargo in space by pressing cargo icon its openning primary window, i think its should open secondary one (just cargo window which i unstucked from main UI being in station and positioned/stucked it with chats ). Every time docking and repositioning primary window is no go. Thats why many ppl have problems to taking loots(ammos etc) from containers in space, like on sb ops/pos bush etc.
P.S. still would like to hear from Designers who worked on ship textures, why they decided to make mostly spaceships in camouflage, is it not absurd? i mean its not "Tanks online" etc.
o7 |
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
429
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:09:00 -
[178] - Quote
Rommiee wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:
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.
Sadly, yes she did say that. It pretty much sums up CCP's attitude lately.
Just to clear this up for the last time as you obviously didn't read the entire thread - CCP Punkturis was talking about the UI as in USER INTERFACE on EVE TV .. not the unified inventory. Also, reading this thread (note not just the post above, but the entire thread) has made me really sad, no one deserves to be spoken to like this. CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 |-á @CCP_Affinity |
|
Glageny
Burning Rotten Blood Solar Citizens
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:12:00 -
[179] - Quote
What did you do wiht Mackinaw?
It no more has a 100% ice yield bonus!!!
I think there BIG mistake in rebalance when ROLE bonus was change to STRIP MINER 50% because Mackinaw is ICE oriented exhumer. It's shurely BUG. Please return or add ICE ROLE bonus: 100% ice harvester yield. Or decrease ice harvester time duration at least 50%. Because It is, when compared it with 100% ice harvesting yield. Otherwise where now an Ice oriented exhumer? All of them now has ONLY strip miner yield ROLE bonuses and no one ICE Role anymore. If you say: "it hase ice role - 33,33% reduction in ice harvester duration". But it was 50% when compared it's with 100% ice harvesting yield. And in this case when 50% you reduce to 33% - mackinaw ceases to be an Ice harvesting exhumer.
|
Kronos
Mine 'N' Refine The Unforgiven Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:16:00 -
[180] - Quote
All I can say is thank you guys at CCP for a game thats 9 Years old and looks great.
Also you guys always seem to be activly doing something to improve the game (or break it )
Someone tell me of another company that dedicates so much time and energy to a game and listen to us as the players as well.
EA Games Just could not get anywhere near such a good game as this, Blizzard well they lost the plot somewhere in printing money via WoW.
The UI is great I have no issues with it at all, accept when mining the ship will randomly start to move somehow might be me. The Unified thingy I got used to now so can only get better, just wished it updated properly so I didnt have to keep closing the window to refresh stuck cans.
One thing though I would really love to see is a great new advert for EVE and put it in the Cinema with 3D and everything, there are still too many people who do not know about EVE Online and I think your market team needs to understand that online adverts are not always that good.
CCP Have your Breaks and time off then when you come back rock the updates out like there is no tomorrow. |
|
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
529
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:19:00 -
[181] - Quote
So! When will you implement the checkbox to open new windows as default? If it is possible to open new windows via a fugging bad shortcut, why do you decline such an easy solution with the DEFAULT NEW WINDOW via checkbox in the ESC-menu?
I hate your (Arrow's) dumb idea of only one window. DRAG & DROP was EVER a good soulution. But this only works with two windows for me! Call it like you want.. UI or Crapified Inventory... IT IS SH!T at this moment! Why goes the looting window of a wreck back to the ships cargohold after looting? It MUST close itself!
MORE windows as default via a simple checkbox! Everyone who loves this bad fugging Crap UI now, can leave this checkbox behind and never look at it. But a lot of other people would check this to be able to play a game, as they have learned years back!
I am a missionrunner.. I was a missionrunner from the beginning till the 22.05.2012! I made several missions a day, had several storylines per week! And now? Perhaps I will have my first storyline mission, after 22.05, today if I have enough energy to play a game I currently hate!
DO THIS CHECKBOX AND MANY PEOPLE WILL BE HAPPY AGAIN! Why decline such an easy solution. Just to be self-opinionated and to defend a really dumb idea from a developer without any clue of EVE? I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
tgl3
Wormhole Engineers Greater Realms
69
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:22:00 -
[182] - Quote
I'm currently fine with the new Uni.Inv. and I live in a POS in a wormhole. Does that make me a bad person or something? Blog - Through Newb Eyes Twitter - TG_3 |
Pat0chan
Fake World
31
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:28:00 -
[183] - Quote
Great... a new patch! Adding more beautifull graphics, shame I have to have all my settings on low and no effects if I want to run 3 accounts without lag cause the game becomes so heavy to run just to have lil stickers on the side of a ship.
When are we gonna get the promised new modules, death star POS, mining in planets belts.... the real Inferno patch.
BTW when does the UK residents will pay the promessed -ú9.99/ month? (Fanfest 2012)
Fly safe, and check my new paint job on my mach. |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
529
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:29:00 -
[184] - Quote
tgl3 wrote:I'm currently fine with the new Uni.Inv. and I live in a POS in a wormhole. Does that make me a bad person or something?
NO! Not a bad person. But if we could have this checkbox for the behavior of the old UI / inventory; you could still love the crapified UI - but I could fly my missions again and would pay CCP for my accounts. I would have no needs to cancel my accounts! I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
fantazmythe
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
20
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:29:00 -
[185] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:
Also, reading this thread (note not just the post above, but the entire thread) has made me really sad, no one deserves to be spoken to like this.
^this |
Oscillus Perforati
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:30:00 -
[186] - Quote
Glageny wrote:What did you do wiht Mackinaw?
It no more has a 100% ice yield bonus!!!
I think there BIG mistake in rebalance when ROLE bonus was change to STRIP MINER 50% because Mackinaw is ICE oriented exhumer. It's shurely BUG. Please return or add ICE ROLE bonus: 100% ice harvester yield. Or decrease ice harvester time duration at least 50%. Because It is, when compared it with 100% ice harvesting yield. Otherwise where now an Ice oriented exhumer? All of them now has ONLY strip miner yield ROLE bonuses and no one ICE Role anymore. If you say: "it hase ice role - 33,33% reduction in ice harvester duration". But it was 50% when compared it's with 100% ice harvesting yield. And in this case when 50% you reduce to 33% - mackinaw ceases to be an Ice harvesting exhumer.
Roles got reworked from specific materials (mercoxit/ice/everything else for the skiff/mackinaw/hulk) to ship properties (EHP/ore hold/mining amount respectively). The role bonuses (200% and 50% mining laser bonus and 67% and 33% reduction in ice cycle time) are only there to make the Skiff's one laser and the Retriever's two lasers the same base effectiveness as the Hulk's three.
If that pastebin is accurate then there will be rigs that you can use to provide bonuses comparable to what the skiff or mackinaw used to have for mercoxit/ice on whatever barge or exhumer you want to use.
Summary: -Procurer and retriever will get useful roles. The covetor's role remains unchanged. -Tech 2 variants will reflect those roles and improve them with more EHP and tank and higher yields. -You will be able to use rigs to specialize a ship in ice or mercoxit. -(unrelated but in the pastebin) Noobships will be better all-around and introduce pilots to racial flying techniques. |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
529
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:36:00 -
[187] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote: Just to clear this up for the last time as you obviously didn't read the entire thread - CCP Punkturis was talking about the UI as in USER INTERFACE on EVE TV .. not the unified inventory. Also, reading this thread (note not just the post above, but the entire thread) has made me really sad, no one deserves to be spoken to like this.
As it is.. as long as you force this bad UI or inventory, I am not interestet in your "AT 10" or "EvE TV". So please bring DevBlogs.. not a nebulous comment from a Dev who is not involved in the development process. I only pay attention to devblogs by now. Other activities will not be noticed! I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
431
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:44:00 -
[188] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Affinity wrote: Just to clear this up for the last time as you obviously didn't read the entire thread - CCP Punkturis was talking about the UI as in USER INTERFACE on EVE TV .. not the unified inventory. Also, reading this thread (note not just the post above, but the entire thread) has made me really sad, no one deserves to be spoken to like this.
As it is.. as long as you force this bad UI or inventory, I am not interestet in your "AT 10" or "EvE TV". So please bring DevBlogs.. not a nebulous comment from a Dev who is not involved in the development process. I only pay attention to devblogs by now. Other activities will not be noticed!
um.. I would suggest you read my post again, I was clearing up a comment someone made, in this thread, in error about an interview by Punkturis on AT10. Also, who is the dev not involved in the development process that you refer to?
CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 |-á @CCP_Affinity |
|
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
529
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:01:00 -
[189] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Affinity wrote: Just to clear this up for the last time as you obviously didn't read the entire thread - CCP Punkturis was talking about the UI as in USER INTERFACE on EVE TV .. not the unified inventory. Also, reading this thread (note not just the post above, but the entire thread) has made me really sad, no one deserves to be spoken to like this.
As it is.. as long as you force this bad UI or inventory, I am not interestet in your "AT 10" or "EvE TV". So please bring DevBlogs.. not a nebulous comment from a Dev who is not involved in the development process. I only pay attention to devblogs by now. Other activities will not be noticed! um.. I would suggest you read my post again, I was clearing up a comment someone made, in this thread, in error about an interview by Punkturis on AT10. Also, who is the dev not involved in the development process that you refer to?
Please have a look at the several threads about the horrible inventory and feedback. There you will not find a useable comment from a CCP developer. Just trolling, "No! I am not involved in this inventory" or dumb jokes to players who loves this crap inventory? NOT ONE information how CCP will further improve the inventory! NOTHING!
The best comment from your Devs was from Soundwave like: "I ignore you." and from Goliath like: "I have noticed your proposal but now shut up!" Is this the new strategy for communication from CCP? Trolling; igoring or "It wasn't me!" ? I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
fantazmythe
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
20
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:06:00 -
[190] - Quote
callidus can you post a link of that thread pls? |
|
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
434
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:09:00 -
[191] - Quote
I will point this thread out to the team working on the Unified Inventory, but they have been releasing fixes. Unfortunately, when you go around throwing blame at every developer about a certain feature the minute they dare to post on the forums, you will get a lot of ''well I don't work on it..'' and it's not because we don't care, but I'm a Content Designer and on a completely different team so that is pretty much all I can tell you about this feature. CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 |-á @CCP_Affinity |
|
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
531
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:13:00 -
[192] - Quote
fantazmythe wrote:callidus can you post a link of that thread pls?
I would really like to do. But the comments from these two devs and my comments where removed with some other comments from other players. We all overreacted a little bit. I only have a mail from CCP Guard to read the forum rules again and that it is not possible to discuss things in this way. I tried a petiton after that.. but without any chance. Now it is no problem for me anymore. But at this time I could really explode and destroy things. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
fantazmythe
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
21
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:18:00 -
[193] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote: Unfortunately, when you go around throwing blame at every developer about a certain feature the minute they dare to post on the forums, you will get a lot of ''well I don't work on it..'' and it's not because we don't care, but I'm a Content Designer and on a completely different team so that is pretty much all I can tell you about this feature.
sadly most people forget this and just assume you are all one and the same. its the same as asking the accountant to to order more stock and the stock manager to do the accounting, sure you both have experience with money but they are 2 separate departments.
the best they can do is pass on the info to the correct "department" tho i don't see why they should if you just keep treating them with the disrespect that you have been.
|
fantazmythe
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
21
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:20:00 -
[194] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote:I would really like to do. But the comments from these two devs and my comments where removed with some other comments from other players. We all overreacted a little bit. I only have a mail from CCP Guard to read the forum rules again and that it is not possible to discuss things in this way. I tried a petiton after that.. but without any chance. Now it is no problem for me anymore. But at this time I could really explode and destroy things.
so you admit that you could also have handled things better? (not laying all the blame on you but you understand what i mean)
|
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
531
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:20:00 -
[195] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:I will point this thread out to the team working on the Unified Inventory, but they have been releasing fixes. Unfortunately, when you go around throwing blame at every developer about a certain feature the minute they dare to post on the forums, you will get a lot of ''well I don't work on it..'' and it's not because we don't care, but I'm a Content Designer and on a completely different team so that is pretty much all I can tell you about this feature.
It is not just about the few devs who are not really involved into the process of development of a feature I hate. It is about the trolling from the developer who are involved! It took too long till someone responsible even entered the discussion. But after that.. it was just trolling to the players with concerns or joking with people who loves the inventory. After the desaster of this unified inventory CCP opened severs threads concerning: How should we improve the inventory. But no reaction about if it is possible or why somnething is not possible. Opened thread... never looked back again. Or trolling the customers who are not in line with CCPs ideas.
No comment from the issuer Arrow. Some but not usefull comments from Optimal. The two responsible persons.. booth denied a comment what CCP is willed to do to calm down the mood of the upset community. Insteat we can listen to CCP Punkturis who is not involved. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
531
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:24:00 -
[196] - Quote
fantazmythe wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:I would really like to do. But the comments from these two devs and my comments where removed with some other comments from other players. We all overreacted a little bit. I only have a mail from CCP Guard to read the forum rules again and that it is not possible to discuss things in this way. I tried a petiton after that.. but without any chance. Now it is no problem for me anymore. But at this time I could really explode and destroy things. so you admit that you could also have handled things better? (not laying all the blame on you but you understand what i mean)
You are right! But it was soon after the release of this sh!t inventory and shortly after the subscription renewal of my accounts. I and many others (incuding CCP) where maximal pi$$ed off and we all over reacted a little bit. But it is something CCP has to handle if they ignore testserver feedback at once and bring every crap online. Although it was possible to see the upcoming desaster.
Someone from CCP had a very good idea.. to bring new feature as optional feature. But this idea is abandoned now. The only good idea from a Dev .. and CCP does not do it. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
435
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:26:00 -
[197] - Quote
CCP RubberBAND made a great post summarising all the issues you guys posted all over the forums into one thread - they are working on it and will continue to do so .. or they can spend all day posting on the forums about issues they already know about and not get any work done. Everyone knows the unified inventory isn't perfect, but they have already released fixes and will continue to do so. CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 |-á @CCP_Affinity Content Designer for EVE Online |
|
fantazmythe
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
22
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:28:00 -
[198] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote:[quote=CCP Affinity] Insteat we can listen to CCP Punkturis who is not involved.
perhaps, but at least she tried to help. what's the old saying?...you catch more flies with honey then you do with vinegar. maybe if you were polite CCP Affinity would be more willing to get the right person on the job and replying to this thread?
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Ev0ke
296
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:29:00 -
[199] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:I will point this thread out to the team working on the Unified Inventory, but they have been releasing fixes. Unfortunately, when you go around throwing blame at every developer about a certain feature the minute they dare to post on the forums, you will get a lot of ''well I don't work on it..'' and it's not because we don't care, but I'm a Content Designer and on a completely different team so that is pretty much all I can tell you about this feature.
you should propably use your signature to tell us more about who you are and what you do at CCP, that might help with these kind of misunderstandings ;)
|
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
435
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:32:00 -
[200] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote:fantazmythe wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:I would really like to do. But the comments from these two devs and my comments where removed with some other comments from other players. We all overreacted a little bit. I only have a mail from CCP Guard to read the forum rules again and that it is not possible to discuss things in this way. I tried a petiton after that.. but without any chance. Now it is no problem for me anymore. But at this time I could really explode and destroy things. so you admit that you could also have handled things better? (not laying all the blame on you but you understand what i mean) You are right! But it was soon after the release of this sh!t inventory and shortly after the subscription renewal of my accounts. I and many others (incuding CCP) where maximal pi$$ed off and we all over reacted a little bit. But it is something CCP has to handle if they ignore testserver feedback at once and bring every crap online. Although it was possible to see the upcoming desaster. Someone from CCP had a very good idea.. to bring new feature as optional feature. But this idea is abandoned now. The only good idea from a Dev .. and CCP does not do it.
Having every new feature as an optional feature would be chaotic... no one would ever agree 100% one way or the other and it also introduces massive code dependency issues. No one is disputing this feature needs some TLC and the team are giving it that or that it could have done with better test server feedback management.. but having every feature as an optional extra, is not the answer.
Now, perhaps we can all go back to discussing what this thread was intended for? CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 |-á @CCP_Affinity Content Designer for EVE Online |
|
|
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
437
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:33:00 -
[201] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:I will point this thread out to the team working on the Unified Inventory, but they have been releasing fixes. Unfortunately, when you go around throwing blame at every developer about a certain feature the minute they dare to post on the forums, you will get a lot of ''well I don't work on it..'' and it's not because we don't care, but I'm a Content Designer and on a completely different team so that is pretty much all I can tell you about this feature. you should propably use your signature to tell us more about who you are and what you do at CCP, that might help with these kind of misunderstandings ;)
better? CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 |-á @CCP_Affinity Content Designer for EVE Online |
|
Makari Aeron
The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium
20
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:35:00 -
[202] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:I will point this thread out to the team working on the Unified Inventory, but they have been releasing fixes. Unfortunately, when you go around throwing blame at every developer about a certain feature the minute they dare to post on the forums, you will get a lot of ''well I don't work on it..'' and it's not because we don't care, but I'm a Content Designer and on a completely different team so that is pretty much all I can tell you about this feature. you should propably use your signature to tell us more about who you are and what you do at CCP, that might help with these kind of misunderstandings ;)
Better yet, a wiki page that has each team with their current project (if project is publicly known) and/or area of expertise as well as a list of current members and past projects. Pew Pew Pew! |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
531
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:37:00 -
[203] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:CCP RubberBAND made a great post summarising all the issues you guys posted all over the forums into one thread - they are working on it and will continue to do so .. or they can spend all day posting on the forums about issues they already know about and not get any work done. Everyone knows the unified inventory isn't perfect, but they have already released fixes and will continue to do so.
I could not find a Devblog from RubberBand.Not in the archives of devblogs nor somewhere else. archive: May 2012 archive: June 2012 archive: July 2012
I only found this
But absolute no details or a road map. Nothing what comes next. If it would be possible to set a checkbox within the esc-menu to open new windows as default. If it is possible to open new windows via shortcut it must be possible to make a setting to open new windos permanently! I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
437
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:37:00 -
[204] - Quote
Makari Aeron wrote:Gilbaron wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:I will point this thread out to the team working on the Unified Inventory, but they have been releasing fixes. Unfortunately, when you go around throwing blame at every developer about a certain feature the minute they dare to post on the forums, you will get a lot of ''well I don't work on it..'' and it's not because we don't care, but I'm a Content Designer and on a completely different team so that is pretty much all I can tell you about this feature. you should propably use your signature to tell us more about who you are and what you do at CCP, that might help with these kind of misunderstandings ;) Better yet, a wiki page that has each team with their current project (if project is publicly known) and/or area of expertise as well as a list of current members and past projects.
So we can all be photoshopped burning in flames or have 10,000 threads dedicated to how much you hate us? No thanks ;) CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 |-á @CCP_Affinity Content Designer for EVE Online |
|
fantazmythe
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
22
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:38:00 -
[205] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote:You are right! But it was soon after the release of this sh!t inventory
perhaps it's "feedback" like this that is the problem. all most of you are saying is this is **** fix it, perhaps if you reworded what you were trying to get across we wouldn't be having these problems.
example: :your post: this inventory is sh!t and totally useless :what you could have said instead] the inventory still needs work because -insert issue here- , maybe if you -insert useful resolution here- things would be easier for us players.
this is just an example, thus i am not saying that is exactly how you went about things |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
531
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:43:00 -
[206] - Quote
fantazmythe wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:You are right! But it was soon after the release of this sh!t inventory perhaps it's "feedback" like this that is the problem. all most of you are saying is this is **** fix it, perhaps if you reworded what you were trying to get across we wouldn't be having these problems. example: :your post: this inventory is sh!t and totally useless :what you could have said instead] the inventory still needs work because -insert issue here- , maybe if you -insert useful resolution here- things would be easier for us players. this is just an example, thus i am not saying that is exactly how you went about things
My first comments where please make it optional with a checkbox in the esc menu. But after hundreds of comments without any response from a responsible DEV I got very upset. And I am upset till now! So upset to hate CCP and EvE and to cancel my accounts after 4 years contunied subscription. Just because no one answered to my concerns and ideas. I have tried it the normal way. But the normal way will be ignored from CCP! I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Ev0ke
297
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:46:00 -
[207] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Gilbaron wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:I will point this thread out to the team working on the Unified Inventory, but they have been releasing fixes. Unfortunately, when you go around throwing blame at every developer about a certain feature the minute they dare to post on the forums, you will get a lot of ''well I don't work on it..'' and it's not because we don't care, but I'm a Content Designer and on a completely different team so that is pretty much all I can tell you about this feature. you should propably use your signature to tell us more about who you are and what you do at CCP, that might help with these kind of misunderstandings ;) better?
|
fantazmythe
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
22
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:51:00 -
[208] - Quote
ever consider that they are just too busy and understaffed atm?
1: they are holding the alliance tournament 2: they are short staffed in certain areas due to allotted vacation 3: they are trying to fix other issues that have been left far too long, I.E V3 on every ship and reworking mining barges/exhumer's and although this may not be important to you specifically it is important to others. 4: they have to do all this AND trawl through a thread with many unhelpful and flaming posts just to work out what needs to be fixed.
then after all that they have to actually try work out how to fix it with coding and such without breaking anything else.
|
Steijn
Quay Industries
155
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 18:09:00 -
[209] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Now, perhaps we can all go back to discussing what this thread was intended for?
Fine by me.
Therefore can you please ask the person(s) responsible for the unified inventory to post in here what changes will be made to it with the forthcoming expansion/patch. |
Makari Aeron
The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium
20
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 18:09:00 -
[210] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Makari Aeron wrote:Gilbaron wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:I will point this thread out to the team working on the Unified Inventory, but they have been releasing fixes. Unfortunately, when you go around throwing blame at every developer about a certain feature the minute they dare to post on the forums, you will get a lot of ''well I don't work on it..'' and it's not because we don't care, but I'm a Content Designer and on a completely different team so that is pretty much all I can tell you about this feature. you should propably use your signature to tell us more about who you are and what you do at CCP, that might help with these kind of misunderstandings ;) Better yet, a wiki page that has each team with their current project (if project is publicly known) and/or area of expertise as well as a list of current members and past projects. So we can all be photoshopped burning in flames or have 10,000 threads dedicated to how much you hate us? No thanks ;)
*shrug* to be quite honest, I'm not even sure what all the teams are and what they do which is why I suggested it. And on the contrary, I don't hate the devs. Though I must say, I've been civil in all my responses to the devs and have never and will never be otherwise towards them. I find it a shame that when someone who doesn't flame all the time (actually, at all) on the forums brings up an idea to make the dev teams a bit more transparent so that the misunderstandings about what each dev team and member actually does (from my perspective) I get a flippant and rude response. Pretty disappointing in my eyes. Had the response been "I'm not too keen on that idea, it could open the devs up to being flamed and insulted more." or something similar in context or tone I would have bowed out gracefully. Pew Pew Pew! |
|
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
441
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 18:25:00 -
[211] - Quote
Makari Aeron wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:Makari Aeron wrote:Gilbaron wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:I will point this thread out to the team working on the Unified Inventory, but they have been releasing fixes. Unfortunately, when you go around throwing blame at every developer about a certain feature the minute they dare to post on the forums, you will get a lot of ''well I don't work on it..'' and it's not because we don't care, but I'm a Content Designer and on a completely different team so that is pretty much all I can tell you about this feature. you should propably use your signature to tell us more about who you are and what you do at CCP, that might help with these kind of misunderstandings ;) Better yet, a wiki page that has each team with their current project (if project is publicly known) and/or area of expertise as well as a list of current members and past projects. So we can all be photoshopped burning in flames or have 10,000 threads dedicated to how much you hate us? No thanks ;) *shrug* to be quite honest, I'm not even sure what all the teams are and what they do which is why I suggested it. And on the contrary, I don't hate the devs. Though I must say, I've been civil in all my responses to the devs and have never and will never be otherwise towards them. I find it a shame that when someone who doesn't flame all the time (actually, at all) on the forums brings up an idea to make the dev teams a bit more transparent so that the misunderstandings about what each dev team and member actually does (from my perspective) I get a flippant and rude response. Pretty disappointing in my eyes. Had the response been "I'm not too keen on that idea, it could open the devs up to being flamed and insulted more." or something similar in context or tone I would have bowed out gracefully.
I was joking - hence the wink at the end. I did not mean to come across as rude at all and for that I apologise. I'm on team Five 0 - we work on Crimewatch, Incursions, other PvE things
CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 |-á @CCP_Affinity Content Designer for EVE Online |
|
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1016
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 18:27:00 -
[212] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote:fantazmythe wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:You are right! But it was soon after the release of this sh!t inventory perhaps it's "feedback" like this that is the problem. all most of you are saying is this is **** fix it, perhaps if you reworded what you were trying to get across we wouldn't be having these problems. example: :your post: this inventory is sh!t and totally useless :what you could have said instead] the inventory still needs work because -insert issue here- , maybe if you -insert useful resolution here- things would be easier for us players. this is just an example, thus i am not saying that is exactly how you went about things My first comments where please make it optional with a checkbox in the esc menu. But after hundreds of comments without any response from a responsible DEV I got very upset. And I am upset till now! So upset to hate CCP and EvE and to cancel my accounts after 4 years continued subscription. Just because no one answered to my concerns and ideas. I have tried it the normal way. But the normal way will be ignored from CCP!
Maybe Becuase your question was, gasp, allready addressed.
Maybe you should take a chill pill. http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
Makari Aeron
The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium
22
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 18:29:00 -
[213] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:
{snip because I was quoting too many posts}
I was joking - hence the wink at the end. I did not mean to come across as rude at all and for that I apologise. I'm on team Five 0 - we work on Crimewatch, Incursions, other PvE things
Ah, then my apologies as well. I suppose it's hard to tell the context of a text post from time to time. Pew Pew Pew! |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
353
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 18:32:00 -
[214] - Quote
The UI devblog for the 1.2 patch is not out yet. Until it does stop complaining please. Two of the main issues for the United Inventory is addressed on Sisi there are some corner cases not addressed but it is closer to what people want. With those 2 changes on Sisi there should be time for one more fix before this update goes live. I just hope all the bug reports get fixed also |
BobFenner
Black Hole Runners
22
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 18:33:00 -
[215] - Quote
There does seem to be an awful lot of anger concerning the new inventory on both sides of the field.
Maybe the answer would be for the ACTUAL devs involved on the project to spend a few minutes a day answering the people who ultimately pay their wages.
I love this game and will probably continue to play as long as its around. But the new inventory system IS worse than the old one in so many ways.
If it is possible to do a rollback to the old inventory then may I suggest this be done until you have fixed the new inventory system.
Once the new inventory has the same level of functionality as the old one and it has been tested more thoroughly on SISI THEN roll it out on TQ.
Just a suggestion from a loyal customer..... My missus thinks of EvE as 'the other woman'. :) |
Chokichi Ozuwara
Royal One Piece Corporation Deadly Unknown
386
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 18:55:00 -
[216] - Quote
BobFenner wrote:Maybe the answer would be for the ACTUAL devs involved on the project to spend a few minutes a day answering the people who ultimately pay their wages. CCP be accountable and transparent?
What are you smoking?
Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round. |
Kinis Deren
EVE University Ivy League
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 19:04:00 -
[217] - Quote
Imho, Inferno 1.2 is looking good and continues the progressive work started in Crucible. Keep on rocking New Eden dev dudes & dudettes!
For the devs on vacation - hope you have a great time and a well deserved break. I. for one, appreciate you using your free time to come to the forums to answer Q's from the community.
For the devs who are unwell - hope you get well soon and make a speedy return to the crazy world of internet spaceships. |
Droidyk
Maniacal Miners INC The Omega Industries
3
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 20:06:00 -
[218] - Quote
Panhead4411 wrote:Why sooo black? I'm tired of seeing all my favorite ships getting re-textured to look like they were drug through poo or dipped in old motor oil.
And holy Dramiel Batman!!! That thing is HUGE now....it doesn't look right compared to other frigs now.
What about the bloody Inventory updates???? The ones that were promised on a weekly basis?
They will do it to all V3ed ships, the minmatar is already resized and rifters are now cruiser sized.. so no more fighter scale battles flying between huge behemoths.. the frigs are behemoths themselfs now.. We need them back to normal size, they now look like they would be operated by more people than one.
|
Lord Helghast
Dirty Old Bastards Nulli Secunda
102
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 20:26:00 -
[219] - Quote
You do realize the frigs weren't supposed to appear to be tiny specs right they aren't "small" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evD5xqIHLmI&feature=related |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
147
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 21:19:00 -
[220] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Noriko Mai wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Believe it or not, but we are people just like you. I'm praying to the Lords of EVE every time before I go to bed and you tell me only now that you are normal people... Just like me and all the others... and... but... ehm... We are like Greek gods, come to Fanfest 2013 and we'll demonstrate.
u best not blow my boat up when i moor it up in the dock!
i would be most displeased! |
|
None ofthe Above
303
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 21:31:00 -
[221] - Quote
Droidyk wrote:... the minmatar is already resized and rifters are now cruiser sized.. so no more fighter scale battles flying between huge behemoths.. the frigs are behemoths themselfs now.. We need them back to normal size, they now look like they would be operated by more people than one.
Well not to agree that the size changes are correct.... (I certainly think the rifter change was too radical. If they had to nudge it larger for the turret and missile fittings fine, but seems to have gone a bit far.)
Anyway, they always were operated by more than one person (optimally). The smallest frigates they say could be run by just a capsuleer, but this is a remarkable exception, not the rule.
Excerpt from http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Frigates_%28lore%29
Quote:Because of their small size, frigates do not require very large crew compliments. In fact, many smaller frigates are designed to be flown by a solo capsuleer, with no crew support whatsoever. At most, a single assistant will aide in the event of emergencies.
On non-capsuleer and larger frigates, the crews tend to number no more than a dozen at maximum, though more people can fit on board for transport. The smallest, most lightly-armed frigates usually have a crew compliment of five; a pilot, an engineer, a gunner, and two generalists who can replace the others in emergencies. Larger frigates tend to utilize more engineers and gunners, with specialists in other areas as determined for the ship's mission.
Remember the size is more akin to a full sized passenger jet, they aren't fighters.
EVE is a sandbox; The only "end-game" content in EVE is the crap that makes you rage-quit.
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
783
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 21:51:00 -
[222] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:fantazmythe wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:I would really like to do. But the comments from these two devs and my comments where removed with some other comments from other players. We all overreacted a little bit. I only have a mail from CCP Guard to read the forum rules again and that it is not possible to discuss things in this way. I tried a petiton after that.. but without any chance. Now it is no problem for me anymore. But at this time I could really explode and destroy things. so you admit that you could also have handled things better? (not laying all the blame on you but you understand what i mean) You are right! But it was soon after the release of this sh!t inventory and shortly after the subscription renewal of my accounts. I and many others (incuding CCP) where maximal pi$$ed off and we all over reacted a little bit. But it is something CCP has to handle if they ignore testserver feedback at once and bring every crap online. Although it was possible to see the upcoming desaster. Someone from CCP had a very good idea.. to bring new feature as optional feature. But this idea is abandoned now. The only good idea from a Dev .. and CCP does not do it. Having every new feature as an optional feature would be chaotic... no one would ever agree 100% one way or the other and it also introduces massive code dependency issues. No one is disputing this feature needs some TLC and the team are giving it that or that it could have done with better test server feedback management.. but having every feature as an optional extra, is not the answer. Now, perhaps we can all go back to discussing what this thread was intended for? To follow up on CCP Affinity's post; releasing features as optional is something that we have a technical framework for, but: It's not possible in all cases and we can't do it for all features even when it's possible. In some cases it may not be possible to have the new and the old systems live side-by-side. We would have to maintain full backwards compatibility in the underlying frameworks to support the old systems and that might not always be possible or hamper the development of the new systems. We would not consider to do it for all features where it would be possible, for the reasons CCP Affinity mentioned above: Large code-dependencies and maintenance burden.
In general, we would possibly consider this when releasing new features but in general not when re-factoring older systems. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Software Director | EVE Online, CCP Games | Follow on: Twitter / Google+ |
|
Droxlyn
TOHA Heavy Industries TOHA Conglomerate
89
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 21:51:00 -
[223] - Quote
2 change requests for the new Hulk: Up the Ore hold to 11k to hold 2 full cycles. Add a 2k ammo bay for the crystals or reduce the crystals to 8m3 each.
Thanks, Drox |
None ofthe Above
303
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 22:26:00 -
[224] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Rommiee wrote:
Sadly, yes she did say that.
It pretty much sums up CCP's attitude lately.
Just to clear this up for the last time as you obviously didn't read the entire thread - CCP Punkturis was talking about the UI as in USER INTERFACE on EVE TV .. not the unified inventory. Also, reading this thread (note not just the post above, but the entire thread) has made me really sad, no one deserves to be spoken to like this.
Affinity. I agree completely.
But I have to admit to understanding why people are being butthurt about this. Hek, I am still a bit butthurt about the Unified Inventory. I know better than to think that beating up Punkturis, a dev who was not on the project and is currently on a well deserved vacation, about a quote taken out of context is going to do any good though.
On the other side of the story, Inventory was released broken. Not rolled back and promises were made about weekly releases until "we were happy with it", even making the point that "we" meant CCP AND the playerbase. But communication and fixes have dropped off after some really good progress and "we", by and large, are still not happy with it (and I am not just talking about the crowd that will accept nothing short of a rollback). I think its gotten 80-90% there. I fully understand that we angry users have been a pain to deal with, and for my part offer apologies, but this still needs fixing.
People are mad about it and have some good reasons for being so. Hopefully with ATX (which I got totally sucked into and enjoyed thoroughly, thanks all!) out of the way, some people on that team or otherwise able to address the issue will be able to speak on coming fixes and plans. Which should help alleviate the feelings of helpless frustration and abandonment many feel when cursing the inventory UI on a daily basis. EVE is a sandbox; The only "end-game" content in EVE is the crap that makes you rage-quit.
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1401
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 22:28:00 -
[225] - Quote
Droxlyn wrote:2 change requests for the new Hulk: Up the Ore hold to 11k to hold 2 full cycles. Add a 2k ammo bay for the crystals or reduce the crystals to 8m3 each.
Thanks, Drox
or: fly a mackinaw, or play this multiplayer game with other players a rogue goon |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
579
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 22:34:00 -
[226] - Quote
^ Tell him goon, this isn't sandbox, just do what you are told, then the game makes sense and you will enjoy it. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
262
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 22:35:00 -
[227] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:Thanks for filling in the rest of the story, Punkturis. Maybe the rest of the Dev's will get a clue about proactively engaging with us instead of ignoring us and hoping for the best (which rarely has happened over the past two years). Most devs at CCP read the forums very actively and diligently, and incorporate the feedback in their work. But some are not responding as actively on the forums (or on Twitter) because they are not willing to endure at times the kind of beating CCP Punkturis has been subject to here. Sorry, Explorer, but this doesn't wash. It is not ok for devs to "incorporate the feedback in their work", while remaining stoic and silent on the forums.
If the devs are going to publish devblogs and create forum threads for player feedback, then they need to participate in the discussions. At the very least, they need to acknowledge that they are actively reading the posts, spawned by their devblog or thread. As I suggested to CCP Soniclover in one thread, it doesn't take much time to post a simple ack message once a week or so:
"Interesting idea - we'll take a look at it. No promises, though."
"Yes, I'm still following the discussion, even if I'm too busy coding to write a long response right now."
"Yeah, that probably was a bad idea - we'll fix it."
"We're committed to going ahead as planned, but if it really doesn't work out as expected on TQ, we'll fix it."
Sure, players will always want more info and more detail, but, these simple acks confirm to the players that their suggestions are actually being read (and perhaps responded to), which goes a long way towards proactively defusing player rage.
Ofc, more info and more detail is always appreciated. :)
CCP Punkturis may indeed be subject to forum beatings, at times, but it is also pretty clear that she is considered to be one of the more respected devs by the players. Changes to the UI (user interface) is a very touchy subject, for any game, and Punkturis' interaction with the players on the forums has done much to mitigate player anger and frustration.
CCP Sreegs' method of player interaction may tend more towards a kick in the balls (lol), but he also garners respect due to his willingness to respond to players on some very difficult issues.
So, kudos to both of them (and the few other devs who are active on the forums). Hopefully, CCP will indeed encourage the more reticent devs to follow their example, which can only make things better for both the devs and the players. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
579
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 22:41:00 -
[228] - Quote
None ofthe Above wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:Rommiee wrote:
Sadly, yes she did say that.
It pretty much sums up CCP's attitude lately.
Just to clear this up for the last time as you obviously didn't read the entire thread - CCP Punkturis was talking about the UI as in USER INTERFACE on EVE TV .. not the unified inventory. Also, reading this thread (note not just the post above, but the entire thread) has made me really sad, no one deserves to be spoken to like this. Affinity. I agree completely. But I have to admit to understanding why people are being butthurt about this. Hek, I am still a bit butthurt about the Unified Inventory. I know better than to think that beating up Punkturis, a dev who was not on the project and is currently on a well deserved vacation, about a quote taken out of context is going to do any good though. On the other side of the story, Inventory was released broken. Not rolled back and promises were made about weekly releases until "we were happy with it", even making the point that "we" meant CCP AND the playerbase. But communication and fixes have dropped off after some really good progress and "we", by and large, are still not happy with it (and I am not just talking about the crowd that will accept nothing short of a rollback). I think its gotten 80-90% there. I fully understand that we angry users have been a pain to deal with, and for my part offer apologies, but this still needs fixing. People are mad about it and have some good reasons for being so. Hopefully with ATX (which I got totally sucked into and enjoyed thoroughly, thanks all!) out of the way, some people on that team or otherwise able to address the issue will be able to speak on coming fixes and plans. Which should help alleviate the feelings of helpless frustration and abandonment many feel when cursing the inventory UI on a daily basis.
Yeah CCP hasn't been communicationg too much on it. Most devs who are part of a project help do the dev blog on it and answer questions on it. I havn't seen that dev too much, during this (maybe he showed up, who knows). Maybe part of the reason she got attacked. Her teammate was on vacation, so she got all the anger. Plus she does come across as being "big" with the UI and stuff, which would make her a prime target. ( We only knew to attack hilmar for incarna, because of the leaked emails and other secret stuff) otherwise we would have attacked other devs for it.
The new inventory is pretty bad, its fun though, once I treat it like a bugged program. Luckily I don't have a pos up right now, or have strong reason to use the inventory more. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
262
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 23:00:00 -
[229] - Quote
This page is merely decorative and rather uninformative, for both old players and new players.
For old players, it does not provide any details, whatsoever.
For new players, it just doesn't make much sense, since the information provided assumes that you already understand the context.
It would probably work better if these static image pages were replaced with the video dev blogs, and links to the relevant dev blog pages or forum threads. |
Paul Miromme
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 23:00:00 -
[230] - Quote
I may be trolling myself with this one but in regards of Camo on space ships. Whilst it can look cool this method would have made more sense as it breaks up the shape http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage |
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
371
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 23:25:00 -
[231] - Quote
Please up the ore hold on the Hulk to 8000m3 to match the current cargohold capacity please. I can almost fill my cargo in one cycle and I'd rather not have to split ore up between the cargo and the ore hold.
Also, can you please update the Survey Scanner range to 30km? This is such a simple change that would make a world of difference. Thanks! Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
358
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 23:44:00 -
[232] - Quote
When will the big changes come that will shake this game?
I wish you would change the mining mechanics so that it's actually a fun thing to do. Faction warfare sounds like a great experience but it still mean nothing - why can't we help the for different factions take space?
I feel like i've been waiting for something great to happen in eve for a long time now but all i'm seeing coming from CCP is polish.
Yeah i know, this is a sandbox and i make my own fun, right? |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
36
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 23:45:00 -
[233] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:*] 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.
Max mining yield fit (the reason to go for the hulk over other modules) it looses almost 2% yield versus what it is currently. You do get extra HP (not a real lot), but have to sacrifice crystals storage and ore storage space both. It will not be a very nice ship to handle.
To compare it to the new mackinaw and skiff. The hulk mines 15.5% more then a Mackinaw, but when you see what the trade off is, you will feel sick. The mackinaw has 37.5k ore hold (yes you read that right) and more hitpoints. Compared to the skiff, the hulk mines about 26% more, and a bit better when counting drones (skiff has only 15m3 drone bandwidth). The tank of the skiff however easily outranks both Mackinaw and Hulk and still has 17.5k m3 ore bay (10k more then the hulk).
It is kind of pointless to tank the hulk to the hills, all you get is lower yield then the other ships, a weaker tank and a much smaller ore bay. In your case I would go for the Skiff, since tank is your main concern and the Skiff is still in the same ballpark as you are used to mine.
Also, you can carry 10 crystals on the hulk in your cargo hold, but in order to be able to switch, you need to make 50m3 free. The true cargo hold not counting trickery is 450m3 (9 T2 crystals). The mackinaw is proportionally smaller and the skiff is the one to go for with half the Mackinaw turrets and same cargo hold size. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
263
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 00:13:00 -
[234] - Quote
Please add the ability to fit a Covert Ops Cloaking Device II and the ability to mine while cloaked to both the Hulk and Mackinaw.
Just kidding. :) |
mkint
816
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 00:20:00 -
[235] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:To follow up on CCP Affinity's post; releasing features as optional is something that we have a technical framework for, but: It's not possible in all cases and we can't do it for all features even when it's possible. In some cases it may not be possible to have the new and the old systems live side-by-side. We would have to maintain full backwards compatibility in the underlying frameworks to support the old systems and that might not always be possible or hamper the development of the new systems. We would not consider to do it for all features where it would be possible, for the reasons CCP Affinity mentioned above: Large code-dependencies and maintenance burden.
In general, we would possibly consider this when releasing new features but in general not when re-factoring older systems.
I for one totally get that optional features is a p.i.t.a. However, with features that fundamentally change the user experience, howsabout they at least get polished to the point where they don't suck? Inventory changes are not the first time CCP released a feature half-assed and broken. With how much devs complain about getting yelled at by the players, you'd think some of them would start saying "hey... this feature sucks... let's finish it before deploying it." Inventory wasn't broken to begin with. The team working on it could have worked on it for another year while releasing nothing, and the players wouldn't have noticed. And then when it was released it would have likely been awesome. Well, except for the part where CCP devs just don't seem to understand the point of UI, but that's another pet peeve.
(also, a dev pointed out in another thread that the motivation for the inventory revamp was one of the main complaints of EVE being too many windows... I think it's hilarious that to fix that they simply broke inventory instead of, you know, making windows easier to navigate like they were 4 years ago, that I'm still bitter about.) |
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
62
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 00:32:00 -
[236] - Quote
Lets add a link for everyone who did read this far;
"CCP Fozzie" commented on reaction changes for TECH in the MD forums, I thought that non-MD reading people would apriciate the link. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1403
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 00:32:00 -
[237] - Quote
rodyas wrote:^ Tell him goon, this isn't sandbox, just do what you are told, then the game makes sense and you will enjoy it.
sandbox doesn't mean "the devs mold the game into whatever you desire" hope this helps a rogue goon |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
376
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 00:32:00 -
[238] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:Thanks for filling in the rest of the story, Punkturis. Maybe the rest of the Dev's will get a clue about proactively engaging with us instead of ignoring us and hoping for the best (which rarely has happened over the past two years). Most devs at CCP read the forums very actively and diligently, and incorporate the feedback in their work. But some are not responding as actively on the forums (or on Twitter) because they are not willing to endure at times the kind of beating CCP Punkturis has been subject to here. Sorry, Explorer, but this doesn't wash. It is not ok for devs to "incorporate the feedback in their work", while remaining stoic and silent on the forums. If the devs are going to publish devblogs and create forum threads for player feedback, then they need to participate in the discussions. At the very least, they need to acknowledge that they are actively reading the posts, spawned by their devblog or thread. As I suggested to CCP Soniclover in one thread, it doesn't take much time to post a simple ack message once a week or so: "Interesting idea - we'll take a look at it. No promises, though." "Yes, I'm still following the discussion, even if I'm too busy coding to write a long response right now." "Yeah, that probably was a bad idea - we'll fix it." "We're committed to going ahead as planned, but if it really doesn't work out as expected on TQ, we'll fix it." Sure, players will always want more info and more detail, but, these simple acks confirm to the players that their suggestions are actually being read (and perhaps responded to), which goes a long way towards proactively defusing player rage. Ofc, more info and more detail is always appreciated. :) CCP Punkturis may indeed be subject to forum beatings, at times, but it is also pretty clear that she is considered to be one of the more respected devs by the players. Changes to the UI (user interface) is a very touchy subject, for any game, and Punkturis' interaction with the players on the forums has done much to mitigate player anger and frustration. CCP Sreegs' method of player interaction may tend more towards a kick in the balls (lol), but he also garners respect due to his willingness to respond to players on some very difficult issues. So, kudos to both of them (and the few other devs who are active on the forums). Hopefully, CCP will indeed encourage the more reticent devs to follow their example, which can only make things better for both the devs and the players.
I was kicked in my calls by Sreegs :3 verbally ofc when I was asking questions related to hydra... he still earns my respect for being awesome wub wub wub hi5 o/ 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
78
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 00:36:00 -
[239] - Quote
Ok you Unified Inventory Numbskulls LISTEN UP!
1) READ THIS DEV BLOG: http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=72868
2) Understand the words:"less frequent release schedule" and the word "vacations".
3) Slap yourself for being an idiot.
Now sit back and enjoy Inferno 1.2, wait for Dev's to get back from holiday, and save your tears for the Winter Expansion.
Are we clear on this blockheads? ...Signature... |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
376
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 00:47:00 -
[240] - Quote
Hustomte wrote:Ok you Unified Inventory Numbskulls LISTEN UP!1) READ THIS DEV BLOG:http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=728682) Understand the words:"less frequent release schedule" and the word "vacations". 3) Slap yourself for being an idiot.Now sit back and enjoy Inferno 1.2, wait for Dev's to get back from holiday, and save your tears for the Winter Expansion. Are we clear on this blockheads?
No :3 because devs who release content that isn't finished and has less usability than old thing... don't deserve a vacation :) just kidding ofc they do, but I hope they will work really hard on it when they get home 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 |
|
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
248
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 00:55:00 -
[241] - Quote
fantazmythe wrote:come on guys stop putting **** on the dev's . as they say there only human and they sometimes make mistakes. i for one absolutely appreciate all the hard work there doing.
you all seem to forget that mistakes or no THEY WORK HARD and should be respected for such.
i personally would like to thank the devs for making eve more awesome each time and doing their best to fix mistakes instead of just sweeping them under the rug like other game dev's do (refering to non CCP game devs).
P.S at least you have dev's actually replying to you. go to other games and see if the same things happen
Let me fix that second sentence for you., "As they say, they're only human and they sometimes make absurdly easy to prevent mistakes by being too arrogant to accept unanimous negative feedback and seem to not know what quality control is."
Lets fix your second paragraph. "You all seem to forget that obscenely easy to prevent mistakes or no, they get paid to do their job and deserve their paycheck. Respect is based on whether or not they do their job well."
Seriously. Would a bit of accountability over this damn Unified Inventory be too much to ask for?
All that being said, the only developers I actively hate are every one of them responsible in any way, shape, or form for pushing the unified inventory when it was obviously not ready for release. Beta test on the test server shitheads! Oh, and CCP Optimal. The rest of the devs are alright in my book. Like, you got Punk here talking to us while on vacation? That's awesome. I hope Punk had absolutely nothing to do with ramming Unified Inventory down our throats, because I'd hate to have to hate her :(
Quote: If you don't see a reason for more than one window you have 1) never organised any larger-size library of stuff; 2) never had transfer stuff between a local and a remote location; 3) never compared two things; 4) never partially mixed/merged two things together; 5) and just in general lived a very very strange and disorganised life.
In all fairness, I live a very very strange and disorganized life, but **** me if I'd try and use a single window for this sort of ****. That's just stupid.
Quote:We tried that in the many many (many) feedback threads before the UI went live. It didn't have much effect, since the thing was pushed onto the live servers with every last flaw left untouched, requiring weeks of patching to even get into a semblance of a working stateGǪ oh, and of course, there were the dismissive answers about how that constructive feedback probably didn't mean anything. Roll
Linked
Supporting link: CCP Optimal saying our feedback was worthless. Apparently we're too stupid to know the difference between "Different" and "total ****".
Quote:Also, reading this thread (note not just the post above, but the entire thread) has made me really sad, no one deserves to be spoken to like this.
I'd disagree. The Dev's are paid to do a job. The devs did a **** poor job and really, ignoring that fact took a hell of a lot of willful ignorance. You guys pissed us off first. I'll agree that it's probably been launched in the wrong direction, but someone sure as **** deserves it, and much worse for gross incompetence. There's quite a few folks out there, who if they do their job that poorly, people would ******* die. Pardon if I find gross incompetence something worthy of disdain. Really? A single window inventory? That's like a web browser without tabs. How incompetent do you have to be to think that's a GOOD idea? Now if only I knew who to REALLY lay the blame on :(
Quote: perhaps, but at least she tried to help. what's the old saying?...you catch more flies with honey then you do with vinegar. maybe if you were polite CCP Affinity would be more willing to get the right person on the job and replying to this thread?
Or you can leave a steaming pile of ***** in the floor and REALLY attract the flies. That seems to be CCP's method with the Unified Inventory. Can't blame us for flinging their **** back into their faces.
In other news:
Certain ships need more rust. Seriously. As my alt is Minmitar, I'm offended on his behalf at the betrayal of our cultural values. Feature page is pointless. I want those 10 seconds of my life back :( |
Fenria Del'tore
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 01:04:00 -
[242] - Quote
Inspiration wrote:
Max mining yield fit (the reason to go for the hulk over other exhumers) it looses almost 2% yield versus what it is currently. You do get extra HP (not a real lot), but have to sacrifice crystals storage and ore storage space both. It will not be a very nice ship to handle.
To compare it to the new mackinaw and skiff. The hulk mines 15.5% more then a Mackinaw, but when you see what the trade off is, you will feel sick. The mackinaw has 37.5k ore hold (yes you read that right) and more hitpoints. Compared to the skiff, the hulk mines about 26% more, and a bit better when counting drones (skiff has only 15m3 drone bandwidth). The tank of the skiff however easily outranks both Mackinaw and Hulk and still has 17.5k m3 ore bay (10k more then the hulk).
Please show me this 2% loss in math , because I don't see it at all. The hulk is the exact same mining wise except for an increase in the Ice mining bonus
Tanking differences are entirely intended. I don't see what the point is bringing those up. As for the mining differences again I do not see it with the numbers that were data-mined. Need math please.
Quote:It is kind of pointless to tank the hulk to the hills, all you get is lower yield then the other ships, a weaker tank and a much smaller ore bay. In your case I would go for the Skiff, since tank is your main concern and the Skiff is still in the same ballpark as you are used to mine.
Correct, it is pointless to tank a Hulk. The hulk had a crappy tank and it still has a crappy tank. That is fine. It is designed for supported fleet mining ops where you won't care about your tank. I think with the skiff comment you were saying the new skiff mines at the level of a tanked Hulk. Not sure but sounds right.
Quote:Also, you can carry 10 crystals on the hulk in your cargo hold, but in order to be able to switch, you need to make 50m3 free. The true cargo hold not counting trickery is 450m3 (9 T2 crystals). The mackinaw is proportionally smaller and the skiff is the one to go for with half the Mackinaw turrets and same cargo hold size.
In my opinion, the hulk has been nerfed into a barely useful ship. Even for use in its primary role as that of best miner!
Here is the only area where I think you are making a valid argument. I would not say that the Hulk is useless, or even barely usefull, it is a great ship as it stands. I do think the size of crystals should be reduced. I Do NOT see a need to increase the hold size over 500m3 on these ships. Also in regard to the size of the regular hold. If a ship is designed to have a bit of tank and take some punishment as some sort of ninja miner, it would need a bigger hold size than others due to the need to have more crystals during ninja mining ops.
Quote:In almost all situations the mackinaw is the much better ship now. That 15.5% mining loss can be partially compensated by with implants and a drone rig. The hulk really needs 2.5k more for a total of 10k ore hold to be still in the game for me. I sure am liking the Mackinaw more now over a hulk, given how things stand. Small errors in mining will undo that 15.5% theoretical benefit pretty quick and being able to watch a movie will be good.
Those implants work for the hulk if you fly it same as they would for anything else. Saying it makes up for the 15.5% mining loss is silly. Any errors in mining you make with a Hulk you would make with a Mack, so that comment seems silly unless I misunderstood you.
Quote:I haven't looked at the ice numbers, but expect the numbers to scale similar. Mackinaw remains king there with such a large or hold...the bots will tank CCP once more! It is like it was made with them in mind!
Cargo hold size has nothing to do with CCPs ability to detect bots. Your comment makes no sense. |
Fenria Del'tore
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 01:04:00 -
[243] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:This page is merely decorative and rather uninformative, for both old players and new players. For old players, it does not provide any details, whatsoever. For new players, it just doesn't make much sense, since the information provided assumes that you already understand the context. It would probably work better if these static image pages were replaced with the video dev blogs, and links to the relevant dev blog pages or forum threads.
100% agree with this post. |
Bulaba Jones
Lowsec Static
17
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 01:45:00 -
[244] - Quote
The change with upcoming V3 Angel Cartel ship skins isn't terrible but I'm not particularly sure if I like the look... it looks fairly identical to some T2 Minmatar skins, specifically Vargur. I was expecting some uniqueness but I guess that won't be happening.
All in all, this doesn't look bad, but what I'm still confused about after watching the Youtube promo video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmcAl5ymojM ) is what the hell is an Ixion? Additionally, I always thought the Daredevil was the Serpentis frigate... if both the Daredevil and the Dramiel are Angel Cartel frigates, why doesn't Serpentis have one?
I'm also going to take this opportunity to say that the way Minmatar t1 skins lost their classic, unique, legendary red/rusty color is still completely unthinkable.
Whoever at CCP is responsible for selling rust-free paint to the Minmatar needs to be dragged out and thrown into a geyser or whatever they have in Iceland. |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
1777
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 02:14:00 -
[245] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:Rattus Norwegius wrote:Someone in CCP should tell us whether we can expect any improvements to the Uni.Inv. soon though, and what they are working towards. Paging CCP Soundwave? We'll draw his attention to this thread.
Hello!
I am in China right now (it's pretty much the same as Iceland, except everything is upside down) so I can't grab the complete list. We're looking to do a few bugfixes/changes for August (among them, dragging and dropping to create individual windows) and then give you a bigger bunch of changes come winter. Anyway, I'll be back in Iceland sometime late next week. |
|
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
377
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 02:51:00 -
[246] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Rattus Norwegius wrote:Someone in CCP should tell us whether we can expect any improvements to the Uni.Inv. soon though, and what they are working towards. Paging CCP Soundwave? We'll draw his attention to this thread. Hello! I am in China right now (it's pretty much the same as Iceland, except everything is upside down) so I can't grab the complete list. We're looking to do a few bugfixes/changes for August (among them, dragging and dropping to create individual windows) and then give you a bigger bunch of changes come winter. Anyway, I'll be back in Iceland sometime late next week.
What about the "little things" soundwave... after our Jita Rage... that showed how much little things meant to us..., maybe fixing some little things + inventory will make us all more happy again? :3
And if you have to do bigger things too... could you look into warp mechanics? (make smaller ships, specially interceptors, accelerate to max warp speed faster, and perhaps come out of warp faster too) 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 |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1026
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 04:00:00 -
[247] - Quote
I don't when it will become possible to fix warp speeds but man that is straight up one of the highest changes on my list. but I have a feeling ,maybe next summer? this winter is most likely already planned out. http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
579
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 04:06:00 -
[248] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:rodyas wrote:^ Tell him goon, this isn't sandbox, just do what you are told, then the game makes sense and you will enjoy it. sandbox doesn't mean "the devs mold the game into whatever you desire" hope this helps
Almost, it almost helps. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
579
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 04:09:00 -
[249] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Rattus Norwegius wrote:Someone in CCP should tell us whether we can expect any improvements to the Uni.Inv. soon though, and what they are working towards. Paging CCP Soundwave? We'll draw his attention to this thread. Hello! I am in China right now (it's pretty much the same as Iceland, except everything is upside down).
I bet that makes it interesting to meet women, and kind of awkward to meet men. You down there to help tear down the cyber wall? I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
537
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 06:31:00 -
[250] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote: *snip To follow up on CCP Affinity's post; releasing features as optional is something that we have a technical framework for, but: It's not possible in all cases and we can't do it for all features even when it's possible. In some cases it may not be possible to have the new and the old systems live side-by-side. We would have to maintain full backwards compatibility in the underlying frameworks to support the old systems and that might not always be possible or hamper the development of the new systems. We would not consider to do it for all features where it would be possible, for the reasons CCP Affinity mentioned above: Large code-dependencies and maintenance burden.
In general, we would possibly consider this when releasing new features but in general not when re-factoring older systems.
Dear CCP Optimal. Thank you for your explaination. But can you answer ONE more question to me? You have NOW managed to be able to open new independent windows via SHIFT+click. Why would it be so hard to implement a checkbox within the ESC-menu to open a new window AS DEFAULT? (including a permanently ban of this crap tree view!) JUST one small change.. several windows as default (always use "autoshift" to open new seperate windows) and we would nearly have the option to have the olde behavior of the old UI / inventory. After that I could almost live with the bug / bad idea that it is currently NOT POSSIBLE to have different views of different cargo containers. My container "not refine" is set to a view of icons; my container "Good Loot" is set to the view of a list.. sorted according meta level. NOW I have to switch between these two views if I open my containers. WHY??
You have to understand that I absolute hate the idea from Arrow and his team about the tree view and the "just one window" solution. I love drag and drop. But this will only work with 2 (in words two) seperate windows. Your tree view is useless. Furthermore it is annoying that the window for a wreck changes to the ship's cargo hold after looting. It must close itself. The seperate looting window must close itself after looting. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
|
Eckyy
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 06:57:00 -
[251] - Quote
I came to the forum after finding myself very dissatisfied with the inventory UI, only to find many, many people also dissatisfied with the inventory UI.
I understand you guys want to make EVE as playable on a 15" 1024x768 monitor as possible by stuffing everything in one UI window, but some players are starting to use larger screens and like to have multiple containers or windows open side by side for convenience's sake. This should be the default behavior, not the one that needs a hotkey. |
G01kur Kisel
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 07:02:00 -
[252] - Quote
As a free human being ( can be argued about ) you have the choice of at least selecting the things you enjoy doing in your free time.
It seems to me that most people who complain and argue about the game making statements of how much they hate this or that in fact isn't telling the truth.
In all simplicity if you dislike something or hate something, you discontinue pursuing that goal.
If you had no choice ( can be argued here again since you always have a choice however limiting it may seem ) one could say that your complaints and discomforts are valid, however in this case since it revolves around your personal free choice of choosing a recreational game/ activity all comments about complaints are not valid.
Simply choose something else to do that you find love in doing. ( unless complaining is what you find love in doing : (
So my conclusion is that if you don't like something, don't do it. The irrational idea of complaining about something and still continue with that activity is beyond me. One must obviously still like the activity enough to disregard the complaining he/she is making. Until the breaking point is reached as I think many are aware of. However the double moral still persist since you have a choice on what to do with your free time and how to spend it. |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
537
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 07:29:00 -
[253] - Quote
Eckyy wrote:I came to the forum after finding myself very dissatisfied with the inventory UI, only to find many, many people also dissatisfied with the inventory UI.
I understand you guys want to make EVE as playable on a 15" 1024x768 monitor as possible by stuffing everything in one UI window, but some players are starting to use larger screens and like to have multiple containers or windows open side by side for convenience's sake. This should be the default behavior, not the one that needs a hotkey.
+1 You ar right man! I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 07:41:00 -
[254] - Quote
Eckyy wrote:I came to the forum after finding myself very dissatisfied with the inventory UI, only to find many, many people also dissatisfied with the inventory UI.
I understand you guys want to make EVE as playable on a 15" 1024x768 monitor as possible by stuffing everything in one UI window, but some players are starting to use larger screens and like to have multiple containers or windows open side by side for convenience's sake. This should be the default behavior, not the one that needs a hotkey.
I've been wondering if this UdI (To distinguish it from the rest of the UI - whose caretakers are running away from the UdI as fast as possible) was brought on by Dust needs. The UdI certainly doesn't support the needs of any EVE player that moves material around for a living.
|
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 07:43:00 -
[255] - Quote
G01kur Kisel wrote:
So my conclusion is that if you don't like something, don't do it. The irrational idea of complaining about something and still continue with that activity is beyond me. One must obviously still like the activity enough to disregard the complaining he/she is making. Until the breaking point is reached as I think many are aware of. However the double moral still persist since you have a choice on what to do with your free time and how to spend it.
There's still hope that CCP would choose to listen to their customers, faint and fading that it is. But yes, stop paying for a game is certainly one way to fix this. |
Silath Slyver Silverpine
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
35
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 07:50:00 -
[256] - Quote
Interested in the new mining changes; looks like my indy character will be switching out of the hulk soon for the 'solo' vessels (Was it supposed to be the the retriever series? I can't remember.) As for the unified UI, it took a little getting used to but it's not terrible. Mostly I'm just annoyed at the (slight) UI lag it has introduced, although I'm glad to see it wasn't just my computer getting old ; Wouldn't say I really have a preference for unified UI or the old one.
Can't say I blame the Dev's for not wanting to post though, perhaps they should grow a thicker skin, but still; who wants to put up with the kind of crap they get whenever they post? I wouldn't. Maybe if you all weren't so bloody hostile for no reason they would be more forthcoming. Mutual respect and all that, hard to have when you blame the wrong people for the wrong thing and have utterly unrealistic expectations. No wonder they needed a vacation.
Looking forward to future devblogs with some hard numbers. Until then you all need to relax, it's neither the end of the world nor the end of EVE. Everything's gonna be OK. |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
36
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 08:32:00 -
[257] - Quote
Fenria Del'tore wrote:Please show me this 2% loss in math , because I don't see it at all. The hulk is the exact same mining wise except for an increase in the Ice mining bonus
No math, i simple measured it and compared to what it is currently. All my arguments were valid, it is all about trade offs....your selling me short here. And I like your idea about smaller crystals, I usually have like 950m3 in crystals in my hulk...that is not going to fit very well now.
Fenria Del'tore wrote:Quote:In almost all situations the mackinaw is the much better ship now. That 15.5% mining loss can be partially compensated by with implants and a drone rig. The hulk really needs 2.5k more for a total of 10k ore hold to be still in the game for me. I sure am liking the Mackinaw more now over a hulk, given how things stand. Small errors in mining will undo that 15.5% theoretical benefit pretty quick and being able to watch a movie will be good. Those implants work for the hulk if you fly it same as they would for anything else. Saying it makes up for the 15.5% mining loss is silly. Any errors in mining you make with a Hulk you would make with a Mack, so that comment seems silly unless I misunderstood you.
You misunderstand me, the trade offs are different now, making an otherwise risky and costly 5% investment in a second 5% mining yield implant suddenly more worth it. Also the bonuses on the Mackinaw and especially the Skiff cause for a lot more ore to come out per cycle, per miner. You will probably have to stop a cycle manually in order not to 'overshoot' and start mining a new rock instead before the natural cycle ends. It changes how you will mine and I think it will be a bit easier then before where I often had my hulk mine a whole cycle of a very small leftover amount of ore (a lot of waste). The potential for wast is more now, but it is easier to keep track off and intervene on the Mackinaw and Skiff.
Quote:I haven't looked at the ice numbers, but expect the numbers to scale similar. Mackinaw remains king there with such a large or hold...the bots will tank CCP once more! It is like it was made with them in mind!
Cargo hold size has nothing to do with CCPs ability to detect bots. Your comment makes no sense.[/quote]Just because you do not see the connection does not mean it isn't there! If you see local filled up with a single player name and just different numeric suffixes and you see an ice belt with ship endlessly moving from belt to station and back. You will have to assume it must be bots, but CCP will not do so. They ignore behavioral evidence and this large cargo hold will make those bots more efficient and stand out less. In other words, it will make it harder to sniff them out as a player and gank them.
These changes really are a bot owners gift from paradise...just saying! |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
541
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 09:17:00 -
[258] - Quote
Is it to be gief patch-notes tyme soon, plees?
Kthxbai, xoxoxoxoxoxo
In irae, veritas. |
Shko Grahl
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 10:28:00 -
[259] - Quote
Any idea how big the patch will be? I'm ta a holliday park on a cellphone connection.
Already did set some long skills if I'm not able to dld it
Regards,
SG |
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
481
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 10:34:00 -
[260] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote: *snip* Furthermore it is annoying that the window for a wreck changes to the ship's cargo hold after looting. It must close itself. The seperate looting window must close itself after looting.
I have filed a defect on this after talking with CCP Arrow CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 | Follow me on Twitter Content Designer for EVE Online |
|
|
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
538
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 10:43:00 -
[261] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Callidus Dux wrote: *snip* Furthermore it is annoying that the window for a wreck changes to the ship's cargo hold after looting. It must close itself. The seperate looting window must close itself after looting.
I have filed a defect on this after talking with CCP Arrow Thank you very very much. I am delightfully surprised about this. Thanks CCP Affinity. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
arria Auscent
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
59
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 10:49:00 -
[262] - Quote
that camo design looks rubbish there in space not in a jungle best camo design would be black or make it look like an asteroid
hate the camo on my comet pity i cant buy the police design |
Shokre O'Corwi
The Squid Squad Slumdogs
3
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:01:00 -
[263] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:CCP RubberBAND made a great post summarising all the issues you guys posted all over the forums into one thread - they are working on it and will continue to do so .. or they can spend all day posting on the forums about issues they already know about and not get any work done. Everyone knows the unified inventory isn't perfect, but they have already released fixes and will continue to do so.
I haven't read an understatement of this proportions in a loooong time... |
Octoven
Four Pillar Production Dragehund
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:07:00 -
[264] - Quote
Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment. |
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
491
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:20:00 -
[265] - Quote
Octoven wrote:Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 | Follow me on Twitter Content Designer for EVE Online |
|
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
1963
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:22:00 -
[266] - Quote
Pat0chan wrote:BTW when does the UK residents will pay the promessed -ú9.99/ month? (Fanfest 2012) The option for UK residents to pay with GBP was introduced on May 1, 2012, as outlined in this devblog. The details about the current pricing (-ú9.99 per month and less) can be found here.
I would like to add a more general note: please keep this thread polite and constructive.
CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Ev0ke
300
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:34:00 -
[267] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Octoven wrote:Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage
i would love to See the tears if ccp decided to give US razzle dazzle capitals.
please please please! Troll of the century :D
|
VLAD VIRONS
X-SENSE Security
23
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:35:00 -
[268] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Octoven wrote:Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage
now check the page u linked and pics on it and compare it with Camo/cow flakes or dotty/pixeling Ravens etc.
P.S. i see many trolls in that thread but also have a feeling Developers r not so far from it. Realy disappointed in you and the way you begin act on posts. Consumers r always right.
o7 |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
1963
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:43:00 -
[269] - Quote
Octoven wrote:could you have a talk with the graphics department?
I will see if someone from our art team can explain a bit more the work of our fantastic art team and the driving ideas behind art in New Eden. CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
Rattus Norwegius
21
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 11:45:00 -
[270] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Hello!
I am in China right now (it's pretty much the same as Iceland, except everything is upside down) so I can't grab the complete list. We're looking to do a few bugfixes/changes for August (among them, dragging and dropping to create individual windows) and then give you a bigger bunch of changes come winter. Anyway, I'll be back in Iceland sometime late next week.
Thank you for your update. I was about to say "was that so hard?" when I realized that you have to type with the keyboard upside down. I can see how that complicates things. Enjoy your stay in China, and don't drown.
At some point in a not too distant future it would be nice if you(CCP) gave an overview over what you want to do with the Uni.Inv. CCP RubberBAND's post here https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1541165#post1541165 finally gave some indication that CCP have understood at least some of what we want, but what CCP wants to do about it is still unclear.
|
|
Sesshru
Lacking In Diplomacy RED.OverLord
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 12:34:00 -
[271] - Quote
so you've been busy doing this? and not fixing real problems
like when a 200 man fleet hops through a gate, and there is such time dilation that by the time our screens load people are already dieing because the logistics are still loading and or stuck on the other side of the gate due to traffic control
really? art for things i could care less about?
player experience points: 0 player visual enjoyment: 1
so glad you as ccp care about how much we enjoy the game over how well it looks |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Ev0ke
300
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 12:47:00 -
[272] - Quote
Sesshru wrote:so you've been busy doing this? and not fixing real problems
like when a 200 man fleet hops through a gate, and there is such time dilation that by the time our screens load people are already dieing because the logistics are still loading and or stuck on the other side of the gate due to traffic control
really? art for things i could care less about?
player experience points: 0 player visual enjoyment: 1
so glad you as ccp care about how much we enjoy the game over how well it looks
its a great idea to let the cook do accounting and the accountant make the food |
Elijah Craig
Trask Industries Li3 Federation
32
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 12:47:00 -
[273] - Quote
Sesshru wrote:so you've been busy doing this? and not fixing real problems
like when a 200 man fleet hops through a gate, and there is such time dilation that by the time our screens load people are already dieing because the logistics are still loading and or stuck on the other side of the gate due to traffic control
really? art for things i could care less about?
player experience points: 0 player visual enjoyment: 1
so glad you as ccp care about how much we enjoy the game over how well it looks THIS JUST IN:- Forum poster demands Artists do some network programming and client optimisations to make the game run smoother before doing any more game art. CCP should take note of this bold new idea. |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
378
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 12:54:00 -
[274] - Quote
CCP... you need to stop asking us to be polite and be nice... HTFU as you said yourself once... eve is a harsh place, with a harsh community, you even use that fact in your videos... stop asking us to be like carebears, webites when not treated correctly 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 |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
789
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 12:55:00 -
[275] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:Thanks for filling in the rest of the story, Punkturis. Maybe the rest of the Dev's will get a clue about proactively engaging with us instead of ignoring us and hoping for the best (which rarely has happened over the past two years). Most devs at CCP read the forums very actively and diligently, and incorporate the feedback in their work. But some are not responding as actively on the forums (or on Twitter) because they are not willing to endure at times the kind of beating CCP Punkturis has been subject to here. Sorry, Explorer, but this doesn't wash. It is not ok for devs to "incorporate the feedback in their work", while remaining stoic and silent on the forums. If the devs are going to publish devblogs and create forum threads for player feedback, then they need to participate in the discussions. At the very least, they need to acknowledge that they are actively reading the posts, spawned by their devblog or thread. <...cut...> CCP Punkturis may indeed be subject to forum beatings, at times, but it is also pretty clear that she is considered to be one of the more respected devs by the players. Changes to the UI (user interface) is a very touchy subject, for any game, and Punkturis' interaction with the players on the forums has done much to mitigate player anger and frustration. CCP Sreegs' method of player interaction may tend more towards a kick in the balls (lol), but he also garners respect due to his willingness to respond to players on some very difficult issues. So, kudos to both of them (and the few other devs who are active on the forums). Hopefully, CCP will indeed encourage the more reticent devs to follow their example, which can only make things better for both the devs and the players. If you had to choose two out of four
- not incorporate the feedback in their work, and not read on the forums
- not incorporate the feedback in their work, and not participate on the forums
- incorporate the feedback in their work, and read the forums
- incorporate the feedback in their work, and participate on the forums
then I would say that 3. and 4. would be the preferred choices. The fact is that even if we encourage devs to participate then not all have the "internet kevlar" that is sometimes needed and therefore picking only 4. for all devs is not an option. People are different.
That being said, I'm not aware of devs that publish dev blogs or forum threads and then not participate at all. Do you have examples, or better yet, do you have statistics? Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Software Director | EVE Online, CCP Games | Follow on: Twitter / Google+ |
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
789
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 13:02:00 -
[276] - Quote
rodyas wrote:Yeah CCP hasn't been communicationg too much on it. Most devs who are part of a project help do the dev blog on it and answer questions on it. I havn't seen that dev too much, during this (maybe he showed up, who knows). Maybe part of the reason she got attacked. Her teammate was on vacation, so she got all the anger. Plus she does come across as being "big" with the UI and stuff, which would make her a prime target. ( We only knew to attack hilmar for incarna, because of the leaked emails and other secret stuff) otherwise we would have attacked other devs for it. CCP Soundwave did a number of dev blogs on Unified Inventory (Uni. Inv.), see the top here http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=author&p=CCP%20Soundwave In addition a number of members on the team that worked on Uni. Inv. participated in forum discussions and summarised for the rest of the team.
(BTW; CCP Punkturis is not on the team that worked on the Uni. Inv. and neither is her team mate, CCP Tuxford.) Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Software Director | EVE Online, CCP Games | Follow on: Twitter / Google+ |
|
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
540
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 13:06:00 -
[277] - Quote
To CCP Explorer,
In case that I bother you again I have to say sorry. But no one ever answered to this proposal.
You have already implemented the ability for a new seperate window via SHIFT+Click. Do you intent to bring an checkbox within the ESC-menu (or on another place) for "autoshift" in order to have new seperate windows as default? THIS small change would bring back much of the behavior and function of the old UI / inventory. After THIS small change I would be happy again. Why does no one answers to this solution? Why is it not implemented yet? Would it be so hard to evolve this function? THIS would be a function to make the old behavior optional. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
mmorpg lol
Entropy Exploration And Excavation
10
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 13:06:00 -
[278] - Quote
I think the idea is that we want them to work towards 4 as much as possible, and to realize that major feature changes should give us the chance to explain why we want things a certain way. A dev post consisting solely of "Why?" followed by some sort of confirmation that the explanation was read( and considered) is going to get you a lot more player feedback on reasons we want more windows, etc. |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
357
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 13:30:00 -
[279] - Quote
CCP Explorer. Even a quick dev post saying what has been pushed to Sisi for testing from a dev working on the issue would be enough.
We have heard from most of the teams in my Sisi patch thread. No one from the Unified Inventory team has stoped by to communicate what the patchs are attempting to accomplish.
Soundwave finally posted up last night with the plan. Three or 4 changes now and most in the winter release. Not what the vocal segment want but enough to give ammo to the forum warriers that are trying to keep the status quo. If you give us more ammo ot fight back with we will defend you. Simple as that.
|
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
88
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 13:51:00 -
[280] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote:In case that I bother you again I have to say sorry. But no one ever answered to this proposal. The proposal is valid and I will look at ways to solve this problem, I just need to sit down with Soundwave and a UI programmers to see how much work it would be and when we could do it. We would also need to compare it to other Shift functionality regarding such an 'Esc' setting, would it only apply to the Inventory, or be a global 'Make SHIFT a primary behavior' kind of thing? etc.
Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:Callidus Dux wrote: *snip* Furthermore it is annoying that the window for a wreck changes to the ship's cargo hold after looting. It must close itself. The seperate looting window must close itself after looting.
I have filed a defect on this after talking with CCP Arrow Thank you very very much. I am delightfully surprised about this. Thanks CCP Affinity. We will look into this behavior, the assumption was that players that only loot one wreck at a time would want to see that it went into the Cargo hold once the 'Loot All' button was pressed. But if the Ship's Cargo hold is empty however, we have now observed users thinking nothing happened because they see no change in the content area of the Inventory window and sometimes they might not notice the focus change in the Index tree, or simply have the Index tree minimized, so this needs addressing I agree. The action should simply close the cargo window once the cargo container is empty, if the user opened a cargo container directly (as a secondary inventory window).
The only question that remains is, if a user opens up the Inventory from the Neocom, and is using the Index tree, will he also want that window to close when he has pressed 'Loot all' on the last wreck in the index tree? CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
|
Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet
179
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 14:16:00 -
[281] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:
(BTW; CCP Punkturis is not on the team that worked on the Uni. Inv. and neither is her team mate, CCP Tuxford.)
Don't wreck such a good thread with facts and logic.
We'll blame Tuxford for everything that goes wrong anyway.
|
azurefox
EVE University Ivy League
25
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 14:16:00 -
[282] - Quote
Looting 101
1. Open Wreck (small Wreck window opens without tree view) 2. Click Loot All 3. Wreck window closes 4. Move to next wreck and repeat
- If I click Open Cargo Hold, then open the Cargo Hold in its own window, without tree view.
I don't think anyone uses the Index Tree Inventory in space, let alone to collect Loot, it's just so impractical it's not even funny. waiting to die is not living |
Jarin Arenos
Card Shark Industries
25
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 14:35:00 -
[283] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Octoven wrote:Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage So what you're saying is that camo ships should have a smaller sig radius stat to represent the greater difficulty in automatic identification and targeting? |
Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet
179
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 14:36:00 -
[284] - Quote
azurefox wrote:
I don't think anyone uses the Index Tree Inventory in space, let alone to collect Loot, it's just so impractical it's not even funny.
Is anyone using the Index Tree at all except for opening new windows that where a simple click or rclick select before this New World Order?
Cargo? click. Items hangar? click. Ships hangar? click. Corp hangar? click. Market deliveries? click. Wreck? select and click.
Drones? rclick and select. Corp hangar on a ship? rclick and select. Corp hangar on other ship? rclick and select?
And so on.
And you know what, all those different windows remembered their last positions.
None of them suddenly changed to another content except for cargo of active ship that actually did (but doesn't any more).
Grump grump grump.
Maybe it'll get fixed or I'll adjust given some more years.
|
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
790
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 14:40:00 -
[285] - Quote
Salpun wrote:CCP Explorer. Even a quick dev post saying what has been pushed to Sisi for testing from a dev working on the issue would be enough. Callidus Dux wrote:To CCP Explorer, In case that I bother you again I have to say sorry. But no one ever answered to this proposal. You should now have replies to that. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Software Director | EVE Online, CCP Games | Follow on: Twitter / Google+ |
|
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
496
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 14:43:00 -
[286] - Quote
Jarin Arenos wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:Octoven wrote:Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage So what you're saying is that camo ships should have a smaller sig radius stat to represent the greater difficulty in automatic identification and targeting?
I was just joking/bad posting.. I will try and remember not to do that again CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 | Follow me on Twitter Content Designer for EVE Online |
|
Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies Joint Venture Conglomerate
99
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 14:51:00 -
[287] - Quote
Jarin Arenos wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:Octoven wrote:Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage So what you're saying is that camo ships should have a smaller sig radius stat to represent the greater difficulty in automatic identification and targeting? No, she is saying is anyone who complains about space camo will have their ships turned Mountbatten pink.
Fear God and Thread Nought |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
4056
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 14:56:00 -
[288] - Quote
Octoven wrote:Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment.
Let me answer this one. Military background an all.
Chances are that thier ground forces have these color camos as part of thier normal standard combat uniforms (not equipment) and thus part of thier military pride to have equipment dabbeled in familar colors as part of morale boosting efforts and pride instillation.
In an age where camo does less good as sensors in eve are not so easily fooled by camo patterns these are the only reason left. Current effective camoflage in new eden are 'chamelon' styled camo where thousands of sensors read the local area and repigment the body armor or equipment. While it may possibly fool the mk1 eyeball any layered up battlefield network would still ID the target quickly rendering the system ineffective.
Spacewise though chamelon systems are totally ineffective where as passive electronic warfare's performed between interstellar ships prevents engagements beyond the 250km range preventing locks or any good hits that far out.
|
Droxlyn
TOHA Heavy Industries TOHA Conglomerate
90
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 15:10:00 -
[289] - Quote
azurefox wrote:Looting 101
1. Open Wreck (small Wreck window opens without tree view) 2. Click Loot All 3. Wreck window closes 4. Move to next wreck and repeat
- If I click Open Cargo Hold, then open the Cargo Hold in its own window, without tree view.
I don't think anyone uses the Index Tree Inventory in space, let alone to collect Loot, it's just so impractical it's not even funny.
I have to use the tree view to get to the different corporate hangar bays in my Orca. I wish I could have the tabs back. This is the only reason I use the tree view in normal space activities.
(In a POS on the other hand.)
Drox |
Vanessa Vansen
Cybermana
42
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 15:15:00 -
[290] - Quote
Sarmatiko wrote: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. Just imagine devblog that you will edit every day silently after any small adjustment. Some of the numbers look like they were auto-generated (33.33%, 66.66% values etc.). This happens mostly with every new ship/module/change. Take this with a pinch of salt.
Rookie-Frigate thread A place to discuss the numbers like the thread above should have been possible ... they even mentioned to do this for the mining barges in the dev blog that announced the change |
|
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
719
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 15:15:00 -
[291] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Jarin Arenos wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:Octoven wrote:Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage So what you're saying is that camo ships should have a smaller sig radius stat to represent the greater difficulty in automatic identification and targeting? I was just joking/bad posting.. I will try and remember not to do that again
No sense of humor doesn't mean it's your fault!
I don't mind the current patterns so much. Some of the former patterns I particularly disliked. The current patterns feel more like a design choice than trying to be "Actual" camouflage.
I agree with Nova Fox that the camo is probably purely visual with the other color schemes available, however, the camo follows the MANUFACTURER label, so one would assume that the manufacturers color scheme would be at play here, rather than an army one (except in the case of the 'faction' navy ships).
What we're all really waiting for is for CCP to let us put our own colors/patterns/logos on these ships, and then we can do what Nova Fox really is intending, morale boosting uniform color schemes for PLAYER faction navies.
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
1168
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 15:19:00 -
[292] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:Also we would like to draw your attention to the new video V3 shader for Angel ships here. what the heck is an Ixion.... and where can i buy it? My homeboys tried to warn me But that butt you got makes me so horny |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
378
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 15:53:00 -
[293] - Quote
azurefox wrote:Looting 101
1. Open Wreck (small Wreck window opens without tree view) 2. Click Loot All 3. Wreck window closes 4. Move to next wreck and repeat
- If I click Open Cargo Hold, then open the Cargo Hold in its own window, without tree view.
I don't think anyone uses the Index Tree Inventory in space, let alone to collect Loot, it's just so impractical it's not even funny.
100% agree 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 |
Selas Arca
Stormblast Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 16:02:00 -
[294] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Rattus Norwegius wrote:Someone in CCP should tell us whether we can expect any improvements to the Uni.Inv. soon though, and what they are working towards. Paging CCP Soundwave? We'll draw his attention to this thread. Hello! I am in China right now (it's pretty much the same as Iceland, except everything is upside down) so I can't grab the complete list. We're looking to do a few bugfixes/changes for August (among them, dragging and dropping to create individual windows) and then give you a bigger bunch of changes come winter. Anyway, I'll be back in Iceland sometime late next week.
So we will not see the functionality of the old inventory until winter expansion? I remember a "rollback would take more time than fixing" from some CCP dev when inferno was released, is a half year really not more time as a simple rollback to some working and efficient system? This shift-click is bad. Maybe you try it a evening and maybe you write a devblog when your shift-key broke or your are just mad of pressing this key every few seconds while looting some wrecks in pve. There was a time you could play eve completely with the mouse, this time ended with inferno.
So CCP... pls fix this UI. Unified Inventory. Whatever... but dont argue who is responsible for releasing and programming it. Just fix it.
|
Hustomte
The Scope
79
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 16:14:00 -
[295] - Quote
azurefox wrote: I don't think anyone uses the Index Tree Inventory in space, let alone to collect Loot, it's just so impractical it's not even funny.
Confirming that I use the Index Tree Inventory while looting and that I find you humorous for not being able to figure it out ...Signature... |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
358
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 16:18:00 -
[296] - Quote
Is the fact that the new NPE does not visualyt scale well not important to CCP for this upcoming release |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1416
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 16:33:00 -
[297] - Quote
Salpun wrote:Is the fact that the new NPE does not visualyt scale well not important to CCP for this upcoming release
What exactly is the problem you're seeing? |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
358
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 16:36:00 -
[298] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:Is the fact that the new NPE does not visualyt scale well not important to CCP for this upcoming release What exactly is the problem you're seeing? A bug defect was just created. When you set scaling to anyting but 100% the green out line does not match the rest of the window. When working your way thru the NPE and the linking line looks bad. Defect # 140801 |
Newbie Ned
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation
20
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 16:42:00 -
[299] - Quote
I was just wondering why this announcement is in general discussion, not in the Information portal - which is surely the logical place for announcements/information from CCP? |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
541
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 16:46:00 -
[300] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:In case that I bother you again I have to say sorry. But no one ever answered to this proposal. The proposal is valid and I will look at ways to solve this problem, I just need to sit down with Soundwave and a UI programmers to see how much work it would be and when we could do it. We would also need to compare it to other Shift functionality regarding such an 'Esc' setting, would it only apply to the Inventory, or be a global 'Make SHIFT a primary behavior' kind of thing? etc. Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:Callidus Dux wrote: *snip* Furthermore it is annoying that the window for a wreck changes to the ship's cargo hold after looting. It must close itself. The seperate looting window must close itself after looting.
I have filed a defect on this after talking with CCP Arrow Thank you very very much. I am delightfully surprised about this. Thanks CCP Affinity. We will look into this behavior, the assumption was that players that only loot one wreck at a time would want to see that it went into the Cargo hold once the 'Loot All' button was pressed. But if the Ship's Cargo hold is empty however, we have now observed users thinking nothing happened because they see no change in the content area of the Inventory window and sometimes they might not notice the focus change in the Index tree, or simply have the Index tree minimized, so this needs addressing I agree. The action should simply close the cargo window once the cargo container is empty, if the user opened a cargo container directly (as a secondary inventory window). The only question that remains is, if a user opens up the Inventory from the Neocom, and is using the Index tree, will he also want that window to close when he has pressed 'Loot all' on the last wreck in the index tree?
Thank you CCP Arrow for the answer. I am glad to see that the proposal with the "autoshift" is not an absolute daft idea and that you think that it would be a valid point.
To the behavior of the windows and tree view I have to say, that I (sorry for my constant repeating) absolute hate the tree view. If I have my specific two windows I need, opened at several independent windows, I do not need the tree view. I can drag&drop things between these two or more windows without the need of an tree view. A tree view would only be acceptable if you fly a ship with more than one several Cargo Bays, Fuel Bays etc. But as it is.. why do I need a tree view from a looting window of a wreck which does not have several bays. A wreck is a wreck. No bays; Fuel or cargobay. Just a clump of hot twisted scrap metal. For such windows we do not need a tree view and it can be deactivated as default - I think. I would deactivate these tree view anyway. In my opinion you can assume that I will never use the tree view to drag&drop things araound. NEVER! It is much to uncomfortable.
Two windows-> Drag&Drop-> Job done. I do not need more steps to move things around. No tree view or something else. The last hundreds of windows UI was always fine for me. You will not find a complain about the old UI. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
419
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 16:48:00 -
[301] - Quote
It strikes me that CCP Punkturis, out of all the devs, is the most receptive to player feedback, promotes discussions between the players and developers, and incorporates a significant amount of player suggestions in her work. This makes her my favorite dev.
Thank you and continue the good work, Punkturis! EVE's 4th of July Fireworks |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1417
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:01:00 -
[302] - Quote
Salpun wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:Is the fact that the new NPE does not visualyt scale well not important to CCP for this upcoming release What exactly is the problem you're seeing? A bug defect was just created. When you set scaling to anyting but 100% the green out line does not match the rest of the window. When working your way thru the NPE and the linking line looks bad. Defect # 140801
Found it, assigned it to the relevant person |
|
Hustomte
The Scope
79
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:02:00 -
[303] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote: Two windows-> Drag&Drop-> Job done. I do not need more steps to move things around. No tree view or something else. The last hundreds of windows UI was always fine for me. You will not find a complain about the old UI.
Aww your bots broke *tear* I am so sorry this happened to you. Uni. Inv. --> Loot All --> Job done (believe it or not, dragging and dropping can lead to carpel-tunnel, CCP is doing you a favor).
/me - sits back with popcorn and continues to watch the bot-owners go into melt-down mode over lost-profits. ...Signature... |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
719
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:03:00 -
[304] - Quote
Had an idea and wanted to discuss an idea for NPE content for more social behaviors.
However, I figured I'd start a thread since it's a pretty specific topic and not strictly about the 1.2 patch.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=136929&find=unread Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Dismus
Jackson Press Galactic News
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:04:00 -
[305] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Tippia wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:I'm on Team Super Friends.
We worked on War Dec changes and new modules. We also made new Kill Reports to go with the War Reports that were a part of the War Dec UI.
My team had nothing to do with the unified inventory. Ok. That just means the opaqueness is one layer up GÇö in what team does what and who is on what team. I just got that impression from somewhere, and that may have been wrong, but the general gist of it all is the same. The broader solution to all this is for people to stop imagining they have a perfect grasp of the minutate of EVE development and holding individual developers personally accountable for development decisions and outcomes. Nobody, from Hellmar and Unifex down, gets to make decisions completely unilaterally, and nobody ever hits a "perfect game" and gets to ship a feature that turns out exactly the way they wanted it to. Making an MMO is a very complex operation with lots of moving parts that have to mesh together very tightly - everything has to be done as a team, and it's never as straightforward as you'd like to hope.
^^ This right here.
You guys get my praise just for trying to communicate with these people. IT is tough business, especially working with ANYTHING user interface related. No matter what you do, you won't be able to please everyone... but damnit, do you guys ever try despite that!! This is why I hate working anywhere near the front end. So much easier for people to sling hate at you when they can physically click on the thing you made (or that they perceive you made, which is more often the case).
I know this will just get lost in the deluge of forum whiners or picked apart by angry trolls, but someone's gotta throw a ray of sunshine out there.
And for all you angry people... just sit down, breath, pack a niiiiice big bowl in your bong and smoke it. All this hate and anger is gonna give you a f*cking stroke!!
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
358
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:05:00 -
[306] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:Is the fact that the new NPE does not visualyt scale well not important to CCP for this upcoming release What exactly is the problem you're seeing? A bug defect was just created. When you set scaling to anyting but 100% the green out line does not match the rest of the window. When working your way thru the NPE and the linking line looks bad. Defect # 140801 Found it, assigned it to the relevant person Thanks There are alot of bug reports out there on the NPE that are not screened for relavance yet Please look them over. |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
541
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:06:00 -
[307] - Quote
Hustomte wrote:Callidus Dux wrote: Two windows-> Drag&Drop-> Job done. I do not need more steps to move things around. No tree view or something else. The last hundreds of windows UI was always fine for me. You will not find a complain about the old UI.
Aww your bots broke *tear* I am so sorry this happened to you. Uni. Inv. --> Loot All --> Job done (believe it or not, dragging and dropping can lead to carpel-tunnel, CCP is doing you a favor). /me - sits back with popcorn and continues to watch the bot-owners go into melt-down mode over lost-profits.
I do not use bots. I never did. I just hate the whole concept of UNIFIED inventory and tree view. So stop trolling! Read my post COMPLETE again. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
Quaaid
ABOS Industrial Enterprises
76
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:08:00 -
[308] - Quote
Dat's my Birfday. |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
379
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:13:00 -
[309] - Quote
Hustomte wrote:Callidus Dux wrote: Two windows-> Drag&Drop-> Job done. I do not need more steps to move things around. No tree view or something else. The last hundreds of windows UI was always fine for me. You will not find a complain about the old UI.
Aww your bots broke *tear* I am so sorry this happened to you. Uni. Inv. --> Loot All --> Job done (believe it or not, dragging and dropping can lead to carpel-tunnel, CCP is doing you a favor). /me - sits back with popcorn and continues to watch the bot-owners go into melt-down mode over lost-profits.
carpel-tunnel is for noobs, drag and drop is the most efficient way to move stuff (what if you don't want it all?) 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 |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
268
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:28:00 -
[310] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:If you had to choose two out of four
- not incorporate the feedback in their work, and not read on the forums
- not incorporate the feedback in their work, and not participate on the forums
- incorporate the feedback in their work, and read the forums
- incorporate the feedback in their work, and participate on the forums
then I would say that 3. and 4. would be the preferred choices. The fact is that even if we encourage devs to participate then not all have the "internet kevlar" that is sometimes needed and therefore picking only 4. for all devs is not an option. People are different. First off, choices 1 and 2 are *exactly* what many players think happens at CCP. This is the underlying reason for much player rage.
Second, choice 3 does not differ much from choices 1 and 2, as seen from the perspective of the players in the forums. If you are going to solicit feedback from players, you absolutely need to provide an immediate and visible acknowledgment that the feedback is being read and perhaps incorporated in the work. Currently, there is no automatic method on the forums for indicating when a dev reads a thread, so it falls on the devs to do so, by manually posting a response in the thread. BTW, just for the record, I did suggest adding such an automatic feature to the forums, in the new feature suggestion thread.
And, no, it is not sufficient to just tell players that you are doing choice 3 - most of them will not believe you. This should be obvious by now. The lag between player feedback and actual implementation of such feedback can often be measured in weeks, months, and even years (another sore spot with players, as you know - particularly with those players who have no understanding of the software development cycle).
Thus, choice 4 is the only option, at this time. People are indeed different, so please don't ask someone to write a devblog who isn't willing to put him/herself forward to actively respond to player feedback in the forums. However, each feature is being worked on by a team, not an individual - so, perhaps the devblogs should be authored by the entire team, not an individual. This would allow anyone on the team to respond and, hopefully, at least one member of the team will have the necessary "internet kevlar".
Failure to do otherwise simply frustrates your players, most of whom are indeed trying to provide the asked-for feedback and whom are seemingly being ignored - per choices 1 and 2. I really don't think the purpose of the forums should be to encourage and promote player rage, do you?
CCP Explorer wrote:That being said, I'm not aware of devs that publish dev blogs or forum threads and then not participate at all. Do you have examples, or better yet, do you have statistics? Statistics, no. Examples, yes - but, I'd prefer to avoid airing them here, since it would seem as if I were singling out specific devs for criticism and encouraging other players to jump on a "bash the dev" bandwagon. That would be somewhat counter-productive, since it is likely to make the reticent devs even more reticent. Please contact me via Eve mail, and we can certainly discuss specific examples. |
|
Hustomte
The Scope
79
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:37:00 -
[311] - Quote
Bubanni wrote: carpel-tunnel is for noobs, drag and drop is the most efficient way to move stuff (what if you don't want it all?)
In that case I ctrl-click on the items I want and drag-drop them into my cargo on the tree-view. The new Uni. Inv. is so easy to use I seriously don't know how you guys don't get it.
You can even close the wreck with the "X" next to the word "Wreck" if you were so inclined. Imagine that ...Signature... |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1698
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:43:00 -
[312] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Yes the goal is for you to be able to safely "AFK" mine in 0.5 in an untanked Hulk and never worry about anything blowing you up because CCP will re-prioritize everything to nerf suicide ganking for the nth time
CCP likes to make people rage, even you Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Hustomte
The Scope
79
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:51:00 -
[313] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote:I have changed this post because my answer is not longer necessary due to a sassy but deleted posts from Hustomte. BTW I never used bots. I ever liked to play EVE. Believe it or not. I just do not like the unified inventory. Thats all.
TROLOLOLOL! .... other posts were deleted and mine got moved back a page Anyway, you are obviously passionate about this issue, and I believe the dev's have pointed out repeatedly about people being on vacation, less-frequent release schedules, etc. etc. So i am assuming your very blunt-writing style makes it sound like either of two things:
1) You are a disgruntled bot runner who has a LOT to lose with the Uni. Inv. not being "the way it was". 2) Lack serious communication skills in dealing with humans.
Several of us dev-fans have been on the defense of our beloved creators to point out painfully obvious details as well as hope that this thread would get back on topic.... discussing Inferno 1.2 as mentioned in the related dev-blog.
So yeah, I'll just mention that I am eagerly awaiting the mining barge changes (even bought a Procurer BPO the other day in anticipation). The tech "fix" with alchemy (please I hope we get a better word for it than something medieval sounding). And the new beautiful cow-bell Angles skins. I am however still holding my thumbs for a release of the Ixion to the players.
Only 14 days (2 weeks) from the time of this post until release. ...Signature... |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
541
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 17:59:00 -
[314] - Quote
Hustomte wrote: 1) You are a disgruntled bot runner who has a LOT to lose with the Uni. Inv. not being "the way it was".
And YOU are crackbrained! I never run bots and I never intent to do! So why do you think that I use bots? You do not know me. You just suggest some sh!t.
NOT every one who hates the unified inventory is automatically a bot runner. Have a look at all the available threads AGAINST this inventory. You really want to say that all these guys are bot runners? Perhaps I should ask them and link your comment within the question. Lets see what they think about it. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
424
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 18:03:00 -
[315] - Quote
Hustomte wrote:1) You are a disgruntled bot runner who has a LOT to lose with the Uni. Inv. not being "the way it was". Yeah, I'm sure an automated program is completely incapable of dealing with unified inventory. Programs totally care about how user friendly interfaces are... EVE's 4th of July Fireworks |
Challu
Wishful Desires Inc. Armada Assail
47
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 18:44:00 -
[316] - Quote
Hustomte wrote: ... stuff ...
Several of us dev-fans have been on the defense of our beloved creators to point out painfully obvious details as well as hope that this thread would get back on topic.... discussing Inferno 1.2 as mentioned in the related dev-blog.
... stuff ...
Feel free to limit yourself to the devblog if you so wish, but if there are UInv changes making its way into 1.2, it's fair game. Specially because those are good changes and will go a way towards allaying player concerns. |
Challu
Wishful Desires Inc. Armada Assail
47
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 18:46:00 -
[317] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Hustomte wrote:1) You are a disgruntled bot runner who has a LOT to lose with the Uni. Inv. not being "the way it was". Yeah, I'm sure an automated program is completely incapable of dealing with unified inventory. Programs totally care about how user friendly interfaces are...
Heh he's trolling.. anyone who's had to manage a half decent POS needs no explaining on why changes to U.Inv are needed.
Looking forward to Soundwave's update list. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
818
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 18:54:00 -
[318] - Quote
can you reuse some UI elements from the NPE (the "here is your ship thing") for the normal HUD? If you select something in the overview its damn hard to figure out where it is in relation to your ship. A little arrow or a colored rectangle would do wonders.
(the icon for the station and the icon for the selected object is basically the same thing) a eve-style bounty system https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105 You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |
Anvil44
Independent Traders and Builders MPA
99
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 19:11:00 -
[319] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Hustomte wrote:1) You are a disgruntled bot runner who has a LOT to lose with the Uni. Inv. not being "the way it was". Yeah, I'm sure an automated program is completely incapable of dealing with unified inventory. Programs totally care about how user friendly interfaces are... Even bots need love I think those that defend every aspect of the new UI and put down the difficulties others have, probably feel that anything that simplifies or automates repetitive tasks are 'bots' and therefore worthy of the scorn. After all, why else would they defend using shift-click in the face of all the users asking for simply 'click'. (or its speedy cousin, 'double-click')
Some people, such as myself, actually like to sit at their computer with one hand on the mouse, the other holding a drink or a snack, or doing other non-game related tasks, like holding one of their kids on their knee so that little child can see just how cool space and spaceships really are.
I have found some benefits to having that tree open from time to time but I do find the window has to be proportionally bigger because of it...taking up more screen real estate. And I still end up having to scroll through a long and cumbersome list from time to time when at my POS. Especially when trying to work with multiple 'containers'. However, I can say the lag is virtually non-existent for me. Perhaps it is because I have a really good network connection?
If I had the option of using my two screens with eyefinity, yet setting one screen as primary and the other for all my windows, I would not say a thing about how the UI is set up. Sadly, as advanced as Eve is, it doesn't support this technology. Yet. I may not like you or your point of view but you have a right to voice it. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1426
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 19:24:00 -
[320] - Quote
Challu wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Hustomte wrote:1) You are a disgruntled bot runner who has a LOT to lose with the Uni. Inv. not being "the way it was". Yeah, I'm sure an automated program is completely incapable of dealing with unified inventory. Programs totally care about how user friendly interfaces are... Heh he's trolling.. anyone who's had to manage a half decent POS needs no explaining on why changes to U.Inv are needed. Looking forward to Soundwave's update list.
a single window from which I can offline silos, empty them and put them back online?
yeah it's actually pretty nifty, sorry that it's not working for you a rogue goon |
|
Dumas Athos
TOHOKU 9.0
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 19:33:00 -
[321] - Quote
I like the barge changes quite a bit, especially now that they don't pop in one shot from a BS rat.
Crystals ar a bit of an issue, though. Could you make the orebay duel purpose so that sufficient crystals can be stored? It's a small complaint, though. Everything else is brilliant. |
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 20:28:00 -
[322] - 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.
Hm... I always believed that if they're able to build space ships which are better than most of what other, vast space faring civilizations can build, nobody can keep them from slapping some new and shiny paint on their ships. There's nothing a million chinese guys can't do cheaper. |
Droxlyn
TOHA Heavy Industries TOHA Conglomerate
90
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 20:30:00 -
[323] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:If you had to choose two out of four
- not incorporate the feedback in their work, and not read on the forums
- not incorporate the feedback in their work, and not participate on the forums
- incorporate the feedback in their work, and read the forums
- incorporate the feedback in their work, and participate on the forums
then I would say that 3. and 4. would be the preferred choices. The fact is that even if we encourage devs to participate then not all have the "internet kevlar" that is sometimes needed and therefore picking only 4. for all devs is not an option. People are different. First off, choices 1 and 2 are *exactly* what many players think happens at CCP. This is the underlying reason for much player rage.
You forgot "not incorporate the feedback in their work, and participate on the forums."
But I think they're doing better. I'd be positive of better if they would explain why a Hulk's Ore hold can't hold 2 cycles of output. The whole reason I put two cargo rigs on my hulk was to give myself some error buffer. It would make the pattern of 8, 4, 2 instead of 8, 4, 1 that the current ore holds follow.
Drox
|
|
CCP karkur
C C P C C P Alliance
1154
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 21:16:00 -
[324] - Quote
Salpun wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:Is the fact that the new NPE does not visualyt scale well not important to CCP for this upcoming release What exactly is the problem you're seeing? A bug defect was just created. When you set scaling to anyting but 100% the green out line does not match the rest of the window. When working your way thru the NPE and the linking line looks bad. Defect # 140801 Found it, assigned it to the relevant person Thanks The relevant person will probably fix it tomorrow (well, unless the weather is amasing). Thanks for the bug report
CCP karkur | User Interface Programmer | Team Avatar | @CCP_karkur |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
358
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 21:29:00 -
[325] - Quote
CCP karkur. Any chance you can look over my sisi update thread first post and state which NPE feedbacks are feature requests and which ones are bugs. So i can bug ISD to push the bug reports I already have in up as defects.
Thanks |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
579
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 21:44:00 -
[326] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote:rodyas wrote:Yeah CCP hasn't been communicationg too much on it. Most devs who are part of a project help do the dev blog on it and answer questions on it. I havn't seen that dev too much, during this (maybe he showed up, who knows). Maybe part of the reason she got attacked. Her teammate was on vacation, so she got all the anger. Plus she does come across as being "big" with the UI and stuff, which would make her a prime target. ( We only knew to attack hilmar for incarna, because of the leaked emails and other secret stuff) otherwise we would have attacked other devs for it. CCP Soundwave did a number of dev blogs on Unified Inventory (Uni. Inv.), see the top here http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=author&p=CCP%20Soundwave In addition a number of members on the team that worked on Uni. Inv. participated in forum discussions and summarised for the rest of the team. (BTW; CCP Punkturis is not on the team that worked on the Uni. Inv. and neither is her team mate, CCP Tuxford.)
Thanks for the reply. I mostly meant, that I read Seleene's blog and it mentions meeting the CCP dev, CCP Arrow. Seleene then tells us he is the guy who did the unified inventory. I meant where is Arrow at? You mentioned soundwave and others, and they are cool and well trained to calm us down. But like the new dev blog on tech, CCP fonzie wrote it, and he even posts in the thread over it discussing it. I don't even know who arrow is, or if he even posted anything. (The man who had a baby, won't even tell us about it.)
I kind of left EVE midway into crucible and came back to EVE in infeno 1.1 and had the horror of seeing this living evil in my inventory. I mostly mean, that maybe arrow did do the dev blog, and posted about it afterwards with us players. But I missed it sadly. Gonna have to correct me if he was more involved in the beginning. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
|
CCP karkur
C C P C C P Alliance
1158
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:04:00 -
[327] - Quote
Salpun wrote:CCP karkur. Any chance you can look over my sisi update thread first post and state which NPE feedbacks are feature requests and which ones are bugs. So i can bug ISD to push the bug reports I already have in up as defects.
Thanks Green out lines not effected by UI scaling. - bug No starter system locator in the new tutorial list. - not sure what you mean No way to find Aura in the agent finder. - by design I think, because there are actually 4 Auras (unless it's in the agent finder on TQ) NPE not be reset to a point like the old one. - by design I think Agents for the missions need to be added to the tutorial list. - what tutorial list? Link to the wiki Guides page and New Pilot 101 page need to be added to the Help window - feature request No voice overs in the NPE - by design NPE needs to mention the new Inventory system more. - feature request NPE does not mention the Circle mouse over menu. - by design, teaching people one way to do it rather than confuse them NPE does not talk about the CQ. - by design, sticking to teaching the core game play in the turorial (and CQ are not core gameplay yet) Training while in route to mission 24 could cover a few more topics. - feature request? New objective high lighting in the NPE is nice but looks unfinished. - should be finished, what's unfinished Career agent missions have not changed - normal, Five 0 was only working on the initial tutorial When boarding your rookie ship for the first time the rookie ship pointer needs to stay on the ship so you do not miss that information. Right now if you use the overview to board it you miss the detail. Or move the rookie ship to some where it will be in frame for a normal person who will be more zoomed in becouse they are in a pod. - feature request I think
Affinity and Greyscale might give more info as they have been working on the tutorials and the NPE (and I've been away for over 2 weeks so i'm not sure what's going on)
CCP karkur | User Interface Programmer | Team Avatar | @CCP_karkur |
|
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:05:00 -
[328] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Lots of great stuff...
The only question that remains is, if a user opens up the Inventory from the Neocom, and is using the Index tree, will he also want that window to close when he has pressed 'Loot all' on the last wreck in the index tree?
On several occasion I proposed a change for this problem. It would solve other UI problems to, make it possible, for the player, to mark a certain window the PRIMARY unified inventory window. This window would never be closed by the game itself. All other windows should have standard behavior. You should mark one PRIMARY window in STATION and SPACE. Now the LOOT ALL button from the PRIMARY window would not close it, and from other opened containers, it would. People using the tree would not have a problem.
Let me add to this idee the next thing; make it possible to HARD PIN containers based on station location. The station containers that I use in JITA, are always open when I am there, but I have to shift click twice, hide a tree, and set 2 filters. Its really annoying. The same goes or my mining station environment.
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
359
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:10:00 -
[329] - Quote
CCP karkur wrote:Salpun wrote:CCP karkur. Any chance you can look over my sisi update thread first post and state which NPE feedbacks are feature requests and which ones are bugs. So i can bug ISD to push the bug reports I already have in up as defects.
Thanks Green out lines not effected by UI scaling. - bug No starter system locator in the new tutorial list. - not sure what you mean No way to find Aura in the agent finder. - by design I think, because there are actually 4 Auras (unless it's in the agent finder on TQ) NPE not be reset to a point like the old one. - by design I think Agents for the missions need to be added to the tutorial list. - what tutorial list? Link to the wiki Guides page and New Pilot 101 page need to be added to the Help window - feature request No voice overs in the NPE - by design NPE needs to mention the new Inventory system more. - feature request NPE does not mention the Circle mouse over menu. - by design, teaching people one way to do it rather than confuse them NPE does not talk about the CQ. - by design, sticking to teaching the core game play in the turorial (and CQ are not core gameplay yet) Training while in route to mission 24 could cover a few more topics. - feature request? New objective high lighting in the NPE is nice but looks unfinished. - should be finished, what's unfinished Career agent missions have not changed - normal, Five 0 was only working on the initial tutorial When boarding your rookie ship for the first time the rookie ship pointer needs to stay on the ship so you do not miss that information. Right now if you use the overview to board it you miss the detail. Or move the rookie ship to some where it will be in frame for a normal person who will be more zoomed in becouse they are in a pod. - feature request I think Affinity and Greyscale might give more info as they have been working on the tutorials and the NPE (and I've been away for over 2 weeks so i'm not sure what's going on )
Thanks clears up a lot.
The way the tutorials are set up now you have to be in an accepted mission to make sense of what the tutorial is telling you.
If you decide to access the tutorials later you run into a road block at that step.
Try redoing the tutorials on a higher level character.
|
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1417
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:12:00 -
[330] - Quote
CCP karkur wrote:Salpun wrote:CCP karkur. Any chance you can look over my sisi update thread first post and state which NPE feedbacks are feature requests and which ones are bugs. So i can bug ISD to push the bug reports I already have in up as defects.
Thanks Green out lines not effected by UI scaling. - bug No starter system locator in the new tutorial list. - not sure what you mean If this is "the tutorial list in the help window doesn't tell you where your starter system is, that's a feature requestNo way to find Aura in the agent finder. - by design I think, because there are actually 4 Auras (unless it's in the agent finder on TQ) NPE not be reset to a point like the old one. - by design I think I don't actually understand what this isAgents for the missions need to be added to the tutorial list. - what tutorial list? Assuming this is in the help window again, feature request/by design (I'm not sure we'd necessarilywant to list agents there)Link to the wiki Guides page and New Pilot 101 page need to be added to the Help window - feature request No voice overs in the NPE - by design Expanding on this, voiceovers just take too long to set up and record for a game that's constantly changing and a tutorial that's constantly being improved. They're great when they're perfect, but as soon as the voice gets out of sync with the text it's incredibly distracting, and it's just not feasible to book a new recording session with the same actress every time we want to change a couple of words. Once text-to-speech improves enough - and we did have a serious look into this - that will be our preferred solution, but right now we just don't have a workable way to voice the tutorial.NPE needs to mention the new Inventory system more. - feature request NPE does not mention the Circle mouse over menu. - by design, teaching people one way to do it rather than confuse them NPE does not talk about the CQ. - by design, sticking to teaching the core game play in the turorial (and CQ are not core gameplay yet) Training while in route to mission 24 could cover a few more topics. - feature request? Yup, but if you've got any obvious suggestions please post them here - it's too late to add them for 1.2 but we can plug extra pages in for a later release really easilyNew objective high lighting in the NPE is nice but looks unfinished. - should be finished, what's unfinished Career agent missions have not changed - normal, Five 0 was only working on the initial tutorial When boarding your rookie ship for the first time the rookie ship pointer needs to stay on the ship so you do not miss that information. Right now if you use the overview to board it you miss the detail. Or move the rookie ship to some where it will be in frame for a normal person who will be more zoomed in becouse they are in a pod. - feature request I think I don't /entirely/ understand what you're saying hereAffinity and Greyscale might give more info as they have been working on the tutorials and the NPE (and I've been away for over 2 weeks so i'm not sure what's going on )
Comments in italics, anything not commented on you can assume karkur is 100% correct about
Salpun wrote:Thanks clears up a lot.
The way the tutorials are set up now you have to be in an accepted mission to make sense of what the tutorial is telling you.
If you decide to access the tutorials later you run into a road block at that step.
Try redoing the tutorials on a higher level character.
Yeah ok, I see that point. I'm not sure that it's something we necessarily want to address though - solving it would mean loosening the link between the tutorial and the missions, and I think that'd likely end up making it worse for actual new players (who are of course our primary concern). |
|
|
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
503
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:21:00 -
[331] - Quote
haha ;) no such thing as too many explanations .. right? Pretty impressive that Karkur, Greyscale and I all managed to reply at the exact same time while not even at work CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 | Follow me on Twitter Content Designer for EVE Online |
|
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
579
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:24:00 -
[332] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:we will look into this behavior, the assumption was that players that only loot one wreck at a time would want to see that it went into the Cargo hold once the 'Loot All' button was pressed. But if the Ship's Cargo hold is empty however, we have now observed users thinking nothing happened because they see no change in the content area of the Inventory window and sometimes they might not notice the focus change in the Index tree, or simply have the Index tree minimized, so this needs addressing I agree. The action should simply close the cargo window once the cargo container is empty, if the user opened a cargo container directly (as a secondary inventory window).
The only question that remains is, if a user opens up the Inventory from the Neocom, and is using the Index tree, will he also want that window to close when he has pressed 'Loot all' on the last wreck in the index tree?
When it raines, it shines. See this is what I needed. Its so awesome. Thanks for replying here CCP Arrow, and it does seem, I was indeed a bit late.
Seems you are trying to predict the behavoir of a certain player base and design an inventory just for them. (My advice, is leave CCP and open a store called, Pimp my inventory.) Kind of like tailoring shoes for certain people. No wonder I thought it was bugged. I was wearing someone else's shoes the whole time, using the unified inventory.
Its kind of cool, you are trying to tailor make inventories and design then for the specific user. I do get the feeling others will go first though, and be awhile, before my shoe size and feet model are released. No big deal though, makes a world of difference knowing the situation and having my control back. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
359
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:25:00 -
[333] - Quote
When boarding your rookie ship for the first time the rookie ship pointer needs to stay on the ship so you do not miss that information. Right now if you use the overview to board it you miss the detail. Or move the rookie ship to some where it will be in frame for a normal person who will be more zoomed in becouse they are in a pod. - feature request I think I don't /entirely/ understand what you're saying here
The green tool tip is not consistant. once the ship gets rendered in your view the box directs you to it. But you have to look around for it first. Same thing with the gates.
|
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1417
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:29:00 -
[334] - Quote
Salpun wrote:When boarding your rookie ship for the first time the rookie ship pointer needs to stay on the ship so you do not miss that information. Right now if you use the overview to board it you miss the detail. Or move the rookie ship to some where it will be in frame for a normal person who will be more zoomed in becouse they are in a pod. - feature request I think I don't /entirely/ understand what you're saying here
The green tool tip is not consistant. once the ship gets rendered in your view the box directs you to it. But you have to look around for it first. Same thing with the gates.
Ok, I think I understand. It should be rendering in the side/corner of the screen as soon as you get onto the right page. I'll check it out tomorrow. |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
359
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:30:00 -
[335] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:When boarding your rookie ship for the first time the rookie ship pointer needs to stay on the ship so you do not miss that information. Right now if you use the overview to board it you miss the detail. Or move the rookie ship to some where it will be in frame for a normal person who will be more zoomed in becouse they are in a pod. - feature request I think I don't /entirely/ understand what you're saying here
The green tool tip is not consistant. once the ship gets rendered in your view the box directs you to it. But you have to look around for it first. Same thing with the gates.
Ok, I think I understand. It should be rendering in the side/corner of the screen as soon as you get onto the right page. I'll check it out tomorrow. Yes and I added a comment about the Double click go there option getting forgotten easily. |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
359
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:33:00 -
[336] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:In case that I bother you again I have to say sorry. But no one ever answered to this proposal. The proposal is valid and I will look at ways to solve this problem, I just need to sit down with Soundwave and a UI programmers to see how much work it would be and when we could do it. We would also need to compare it to other Shift functionality regarding such an 'Esc' setting, would it only apply to the Inventory, or be a global 'Make SHIFT a primary behavior' kind of thing? etc. Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:Callidus Dux wrote: *snip* Furthermore it is annoying that the window for a wreck changes to the ship's cargo hold after looting. It must close itself. The seperate looting window must close itself after looting.
I have filed a defect on this after talking with CCP Arrow Thank you very very much. I am delightfully surprised about this. Thanks CCP Affinity. We will look into this behavior, the assumption was that players that only loot one wreck at a time would want to see that it went into the Cargo hold once the 'Loot All' button was pressed. But if the Ship's Cargo hold is empty however, we have now observed users thinking nothing happened because they see no change in the content area of the Inventory window and sometimes they might not notice the focus change in the Index tree, or simply have the Index tree minimized, so this needs addressing I agree. The action should simply close the cargo window once the cargo container is empty, if the user opened a cargo container directly (as a secondary inventory window). The only question that remains is, if a user opens up the Inventory from the Neocom, and is using the Index tree, will he also want that window to close when he has pressed 'Loot all' on the last wreck in the index tree? An Arrow post We need more of these. |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
359
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:37:00 -
[337] - Quote
It might have gotten lost but there are BR that are not filtered by ISD becouse they cannot anwer them easily. Can a dev go thru and clear out the NPE, and UI portions of the Bug report system.
The green edge bug reprort was posted on the first Sisi build and only got noticed becouse I posted a seperate post about it and contact ISD directly to get it on the defect list. |
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
505
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:38:00 -
[338] - Quote
Salpun wrote:It might have gotten lost but there are BR that are not filtered by ISD becouse they cannot anwer them easily. Can a dev go thru and clear out the NPE, and UI portions of the Bug report system.
The green edge bug reprort was posted on the first Sisi build and only got noticed becouse I posted a seperate post about it and contact ISD directly to get it on the defect list.
I can do this tomorrow :) CCP Affinity | Team Five 0 | Follow me on Twitter Content Designer for EVE Online |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
359
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:40:00 -
[339] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Salpun wrote:It might have gotten lost but there are BR that are not filtered by ISD becouse they cannot anwer them easily. Can a dev go thru and clear out the NPE, and UI portions of the Bug report system.
The green edge bug reprort was posted on the first Sisi build and only got noticed becouse I posted a seperate post about it and contact ISD directly to get it on the defect list. I can do this tomorrow :) Thanks |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1417
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:47:00 -
[340] - Quote
Salpun wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:When boarding your rookie ship for the first time the rookie ship pointer needs to stay on the ship so you do not miss that information. Right now if you use the overview to board it you miss the detail. Or move the rookie ship to some where it will be in frame for a normal person who will be more zoomed in becouse they are in a pod. - feature request I think I don't /entirely/ understand what you're saying here
The green tool tip is not consistant. once the ship gets rendered in your view the box directs you to it. But you have to look around for it first. Same thing with the gates.
Ok, I think I understand. It should be rendering in the side/corner of the screen as soon as you get onto the right page. I'll check it out tomorrow. Yes and I added a comment about the Double click go there option getting forgotten easily.
Not teaching double-click is intentional, you don't really *need* it at this stage so we cut out teaching it. |
|
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
359
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 22:52:00 -
[341] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:When boarding your rookie ship for the first time the rookie ship pointer needs to stay on the ship so you do not miss that information. Right now if you use the overview to board it you miss the detail. Or move the rookie ship to some where it will be in frame for a normal person who will be more zoomed in becouse they are in a pod. - feature request I think I don't /entirely/ understand what you're saying here
The green tool tip is not consistant. once the ship gets rendered in your view the box directs you to it. But you have to look around for it first. Same thing with the gates.
Ok, I think I understand. It should be rendering in the side/corner of the screen as soon as you get onto the right page. I'll check it out tomorrow. Yes and I added a comment about the Double click go there option getting forgotten easily. Not teaching double-click is intentional, you don't really *need* it at this stage so we cut out teaching it.
I can see the point but until you redo the second level tutorials. Double click means you go that way and the rosery control panel need to be mentioned. Not focused on but at least mentioned so new players do not wonder why they where not mentioned earlier.
Might be something to add to the time gap on the way to the second training system. |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1032
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 23:20:00 -
[342] - Quote
When using the tree index there should be a loot all button right on the treeview itself. next to the wreck. I see no reason to not do this. thst way they see the cargo pop in, and the wreck pop off the tree view. If you use the tree view to open the wreck instead, maybe it should have an animation to make it more obvious the wreck window is closing. have a graphic that minimises the wreck window towards the treeview, then have the window reopen or a box graphics expand from the main cargo hold. to give visual feed back to the player about whats going on. http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
mkint
823
|
Posted - 2012.07.25 23:52:00 -
[343] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Salpun wrote:When boarding your rookie ship for the first time the rookie ship pointer needs to stay on the ship so you do not miss that information. Right now if you use the overview to board it you miss the detail. Or move the rookie ship to some where it will be in frame for a normal person who will be more zoomed in becouse they are in a pod. - feature request I think I don't /entirely/ understand what you're saying here
The green tool tip is not consistant. once the ship gets rendered in your view the box directs you to it. But you have to look around for it first. Same thing with the gates.
Ok, I think I understand. It should be rendering in the side/corner of the screen as soon as you get onto the right page. I'll check it out tomorrow. Yes and I added a comment about the Double click go there option getting forgotten easily. Not teaching double-click is intentional, you don't really *need* it at this stage so we cut out teaching it.
I'm not exactly what you're referencing in the "double click" but I've seen enough computer noobs and old people double-clicking links in a web browser to think that people are going to be double-clicking everything they can because "that's how computers work dammit!"
Also, please add to the feature request list dragging tutorials from the help tutorial list to chat. So many times i've been helping in help chat and rookie help where linking the tutorial would have saved so much time and typing. |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
793
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 01:54:00 -
[344] - Quote
rodyas wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:rodyas wrote:Yeah CCP hasn't been communicationg too much on it. Most devs who are part of a project help do the dev blog on it and answer questions on it. I havn't seen that dev too much, during this (maybe he showed up, who knows). Maybe part of the reason she got attacked. Her teammate was on vacation, so she got all the anger. Plus she does come across as being "big" with the UI and stuff, which would make her a prime target. ( We only knew to attack hilmar for incarna, because of the leaked emails and other secret stuff) otherwise we would have attacked other devs for it. CCP Soundwave did a number of dev blogs on Unified Inventory (Uni. Inv.), see the top here http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=author&p=CCP%20Soundwave In addition a number of members on the team that worked on Uni. Inv. participated in forum discussions and summarised for the rest of the team. (BTW; CCP Punkturis is not on the team that worked on the Uni. Inv. and neither is her team mate, CCP Tuxford.) Thanks for the reply. I mostly meant, that I read Seleene's blog and it mentions meeting the CCP dev, CCP Arrow. Seleene then tells us he is the guy who did the unified inventory. I meant where is Arrow at? You mentioned soundwave and others, and they are cool and well trained to calm us down. But like the new dev blog on tech, CCP fonzie wrote it, and he even posts in the thread over it discussing it. I don't even know who arrow is, or if he even posted anything. (The man who had a baby, won't even tell us about it.) I kind of left EVE midway into crucible and came back to EVE in infeno 1.1 and had the horror of seeing this living evil in my inventory. I mostly mean, that maybe arrow did do the dev blog, and posted about it afterwards with us players. But I missed it sadly. Gonna have to correct me if he was more involved in the beginning. CCP Arrow, UI/UX Designer, is on summer vacation (he may have come back this week, but I'm not sure since I'm still on vacation) and CCP Optimal, UI Programmer, is on summer vacation and paternity leave.
* UI = User Interface. Uni. Inv. = Unified Inventory. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Software Director | EVE Online, CCP Games | Follow on: Twitter / Google+ |
|
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
579
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 02:07:00 -
[345] - Quote
^, Thanks, he does seem to be a clever arrow, with him flying past both of us. I did do my homework and read the devblog and posts I missed as well. It was a fun read. Lots of excitement about it coming, then the sudden horror and panic over it. Plus Arrow praising tipia, before he really met him. That was golden. I don't need to listen to people anymore. Oh man hide posts list thread, I need one now.
It would be pretty interesting to see what CCP Optimal thinks, of the Uni. Inv. now. Seemed like they were mostly fighting common complaints and bugs. Wonder what he thinks of the nay saying going on lately.
You guys should vacation to New Zealand and do the Mount Mordor hike, and joke about how you are still logged into the EVE forums while on vacation. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
579
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 02:21:00 -
[346] - Quote
CCP Explorer wrote: CCP Optimal, UI Programmer, is on summer vacation and paternity leave.
* UI = User Interface. Uni. Inv. = Unified Inventory.
Sorry to bring back the hate, but why would an intelligent man take paternity leave and vacation at the same time? When he could have both? Something tells me he wasn't using the Uni. Inv. to help him plan the best breaks he could have. (Or at least use evemon to plan out vacations.) I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1033
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 02:24:00 -
[347] - Quote
I've seen a CCP arrow post today, from the looks of it, he's a great poster, and a great guy! http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
793
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 02:31:00 -
[348] - Quote
rodyas wrote:CCP Explorer wrote: CCP Optimal, UI Programmer, is on summer vacation and paternity leave.
* UI = User Interface. Uni. Inv. = Unified Inventory. Sorry to bring back the hate, but why would an intelligent man take paternity leave and vacation at the same time? When he could have both? Something tells me he wasn't using the Uni. Inv. to help him plan the best breaks he could have. (Or at least use evemon to plan out vacations.) He's on summer vacation and then on paternity leave; or the other way around. Not at the same time. Sequentially. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Software Director | EVE Online, CCP Games | Follow on: Twitter / Google+ |
|
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
579
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 02:39:00 -
[349] - Quote
Faith restored, I was starting to doubt the alchohol consumption tales I have heard. Or maybe more insiduous, he needed a vacation from being paternal.
Well thanks for the fast responses, it was fun. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
pyronatic
Mecha Enterprises Fleet Villore Accords
3
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 04:52:00 -
[350] - Quote
WOOO this patch is coming out on my BIRTHDAY |
|
Harold Tuphlos
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
73
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 05:10:00 -
[351] - Quote
So the skiff's bonuses are slightly insane. T2 tank battle skiff runs about 114K ehp base, with about 90% resists across the board.
If you manage to get ganged in one in hisec, you are simply doing it wrong. |
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
253
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:10:00 -
[352] - Quote
G01kur Kisel wrote:As a free human being ( can be argued about ) you have the choice of at least selecting the things you enjoy doing in your free time.
It seems to me that most people who complain and argue about the game making statements of how much they hate this or that in fact isn't telling the truth.
In all simplicity if you dislike something or hate something, you discontinue pursuing that goal.
If you had no choice ( can be argued here again since you always have a choice however limiting it may seem ) one could say that your complaints and discomforts are valid, however in this case since it revolves around your personal free choice of choosing a recreational game/ activity all comments about complaints are not valid.
Simply choose something else to do that you find love in doing. ( unless complaining is what you find love in doing : (
So my conclusion is that if you don't like something, don't do it. The irrational idea of complaining about something and still continue with that activity is beyond me. One must obviously still like the activity enough to disregard the complaining he/she is making. Until the breaking point is reached as I think many are aware of. However the double moral still persist since you have a choice on what to do with your free time and how to spend it.
Or, and I understand this is a CRAZY idea, you can find something you absolutely hate that is with something you enjoy. Solution? Fix the part you absolutely hate so you can get back to enjoying it. I know, CRAZY ******* idea, huh? Who knew, well thought out complaints are generally done to IMPROVE something. What a crazy world. I know. Go play in traffic.
Whoo! Lowered Sig radius! Right? If not, can I request the ability to customize our paint job? Not that I look at the ships enough to actually care, but I'd love to run around with a custom paint job :p
Lastly, throwing more customary hate for Unified inventory.
Bring back right click menus for bays. Bring back hangar buttons for the neocom. Make inventory window something completely separate so I can remove it from my play experience. Give me a check box to default the behavior to opening new windows. Mercilessly flog everyone involved with pushing this **** live with Inferno. Mercilessly flog everyone involved with refusing to roll this garbage back and fixing it on the test server instead of live. Mercilessly flog everyone involved with coding it up in such a fashion that a rollback is impossible. You really gotta put on try hard pants to **** up that bad. |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1419
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 09:56:00 -
[353] - Quote
mkint wrote:Also, please add to the feature request list dragging tutorials from the help tutorial list to chat. So many times i've been helping in help chat and rookie help where linking the tutorial would have saved so much time and typing.
Way ahead of you, already implemented
(Don't worry, karkur did it - I was too busy destroying the game to get involved.) |
|
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
31
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 10:24:00 -
[354] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:We would also need to compare it to other Shift functionality regarding such an 'Esc' setting, would it only apply to the Inventory, or be a global 'Make SHIFT a primary behavior' kind of thing? etc. Since SHIFT is in a very useful position on your keyboard, some of us already have it bound to other useful functions in combat situations. If anything, I would suggest having as few global shortcuts as possible to allow the player control over which keys to use. |
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
92
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 10:33:00 -
[355] - Quote
Salpun wrote:An Arrow post We need more of these.
That will start happening again now that I'm back from vacation CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
Kagumichan
Deorbit Burners
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 11:25:00 -
[356] - Quote
Somehow I would have pictured a faction named Angel Cartel to have silver or whitish paint jobs to emphasize the 'angel' in their name. Urban camouflage seem's a bit strange for a cartel.
What may be a good idea for the other pirate faction resprays could be offer a selection of designs per faction using still images and let players vote which design they like best for that faction. Just a thought.
Just don't go making Sansha ships bright green with black polkadots or anything, they already look nice with their dark red/dark green two-tone paint. |
marly cortez
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 11:35:00 -
[357] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Salpun wrote:An Arrow post We need more of these. That will start happening again now that I'm back from vacation
The only Arrow post I want to see is a JPEG of the team that thought up the unified UI liberal perforated by them.
|
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
443
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 12:31:00 -
[358] - Quote
fantazmythe wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:You are right! But it was soon after the release of this sh!t inventory perhaps it's "feedback" like this that is the problem. all most of you are saying is this is **** fix it, perhaps if you reworded what you were trying to get across we wouldn't be having these problems. example: :your post: this inventory is sh!t and totally useless :what you could have said instead] the inventory still needs work because -insert issue here- , maybe if you -insert useful resolution here- things would be easier for us players. this is just an example, thus i am not saying that is exactly how you went about things
Which rock did you just crawl out from under ?
Over the last few months, there have been many, many, MANY threads giving very constructive feedback. The first of which was when this pile of crap was introduced to SISI. I don't know if you have heard of that, but it is CCP's Test server. Used for ummmm, testing.
All the feedback on that thread was completeley ignored. I mean COMPLETELY ignored and the new UI was introduced to TQ. So don't come on here with your uninformed comments about no constructive feeback.
Jeez |
darmwand
Repo.
62
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 12:36:00 -
[359] - Quote
Kagumichan wrote:Just don't go making Sansha ships bright green with black polkadots or anything, they already look nice with their dark red/dark green two-tone paint.
Don't worry, they'll get their camouflage paint soon enough. darmwand Repossession Agent http://www.repo-corp.net/ Recruitment is OPEN |
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
92
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 14:33:00 -
[360] - Quote
Lucas Quaan wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:We would also need to compare it to other Shift functionality regarding such an 'Esc' setting, would it only apply to the Inventory, or be a global 'Make SHIFT a primary behavior' kind of thing? etc. Since SHIFT is in a very useful position on your keyboard, some of us already have it bound to other useful functions in combat situations. If anything, I would suggest having as few global shortcuts as possible to allow the player control over which keys to use.
What I meant to say was: If what currently needs Shift click is changed to work without Shift click (as an option), should that be only for the Inventory or extend to other UI elements currently used by Shift click? Example would be the Overview when opening up a Cargo hold of a wreck.
(UI is an acronym for User Interface.) CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
|
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
12
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 14:58:00 -
[361] - Quote
I'd appreciate it if you took the tracking cookies out of the feature page, it's kind of annoying that it sets off my antivirus to look at it.
Also, would ya get over it and start rebuilding the old UI, it performed far better than this pile of junk we have now. |
Droxlyn
TOHA Heavy Industries TOHA Conglomerate
91
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 15:26:00 -
[362] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:What I meant to say was: If what currently needs Shift click is changed to work without Shift click (as an option), should that be only for the Inventory or extend to other UI elements currently used by Shift click? Example would be the Overview when opening up a Cargo hold of a wreck.
(UI is an acronym for User Interface.)
Anywhere where a shift-click would get you a new inventory window would always give you a new inventory window with this option turned on. Any other User Interface behaviors that do not involve Unified Inventory would not use this setting. The only exception would be the NeoCom since it is now an "open window" manager.
At least that is how I interpret it and would expect it to work.
And always have a button for each Ship and Items in the NeoCon while docked. Also, I can't drop ships into my station cargo window and I could do that before and have them automatically go to the right spot. This is quite annoying when emptying an Orca/Freighter or whatever that has ships and items mixed up in the cargohold and you're emptying out to the station. You now have to do two moves where one was enough.
Drox |
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE
3
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 15:53:00 -
[363] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Octoven wrote:Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage
Awesome post CCP Affinity. As a WW2 buff it is great to see this posted here for reference. My only advice would be to INCLUDE such reference "Dazzle Camoflage" in the Patch notes to educate.
The only downside is that the "look at" feature and the overview kind of "kill" the actual functionality of this and thus he rage AGAINST camo. I know it isn't possible probably, but I would change the look at feature to allow zooming in ONLY via mouse wheel or something when in actual combat and maybe change the overview option to say just "battleship" instead of "raven" so as to make it Real Life useful - ya know? It would give sniping ships a few second more advantage and make engagements very interesting. You would have to sell the realism factor to players (to prevent flames from burning CCP HQ) but it would be a neat dynamic to ADD to EVE Online.
(P.S. I always wondered why we could instantly zoom to ships in combat from the time I started playing - ruined the realism to me) |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
359
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 15:55:00 -
[364] - Quote
Changes in the new build? |
Dismus
Jackson Press Galactic News
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 16:28:00 -
[365] - Quote
Salpun wrote:Changes in the new build?
Apparently the biggest change is the mad rash of responses from Devs. Or maybe I've been hiding from the forums too much.
This is awesome in its own right. |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1040
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 16:50:00 -
[366] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Lucas Quaan wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:We would also need to compare it to other Shift functionality regarding such an 'Esc' setting, would it only apply to the Inventory, or be a global 'Make SHIFT a primary behavior' kind of thing? etc. Since SHIFT is in a very useful position on your keyboard, some of us already have it bound to other useful functions in combat situations. If anything, I would suggest having as few global shortcuts as possible to allow the player control over which keys to use. What I meant to say was: If what currently needs Shift click is changed to work without Shift click (as an option), should that be only for the Inventory or extend to other UI elements currently used by Shift click? Example would be the Overview when opening up a Cargo hold of a wreck. ( UI is an acronym for User Interface.)
lets put it this way. shift click currently opens a new show info window. There is a setting to make it so shift click does the opposite, and opens show info in the same window.
this toggle, allready there, should effect everything shift click if possible. so when your show info windows defualt to opening in a new window, then a wreck for instance should do the same thing when you click open wreck in the overview. Instead of having to hold shift. But you can still hold shift if you want to open it in the current window.
? is that at all possible?
also where else is shift used? i feel like my suggestion might actully be daft since I don't work on the UI all the time :P in other words, yes, it should be optional since it is for show info? what else even uses shift? http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
382
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 17:21:00 -
[367] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Lucas Quaan wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:We would also need to compare it to other Shift functionality regarding such an 'Esc' setting, would it only apply to the Inventory, or be a global 'Make SHIFT a primary behavior' kind of thing? etc. Since SHIFT is in a very useful position on your keyboard, some of us already have it bound to other useful functions in combat situations. If anything, I would suggest having as few global shortcuts as possible to allow the player control over which keys to use. What I meant to say was: If what currently needs Shift click is changed to work without Shift click (as an option), should that be only for the Inventory or extend to other UI elements currently used by Shift click? Example would be the Overview when opening up a Cargo hold of a wreck. ( UI is an acronym for User Interface.)
To give answere to this question, if you mean anything related to the Unified Inventory... then yes! :)
Doubleclicking/opening a wrecks cargo bay or a container should also open a new window then! Edit: (as long as you don't affect stuff not related to the inventory, like show info in new window or same, like Moon mentioned above me) hope that helps :D 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
81
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 18:14:00 -
[368] - Quote
What I see here is a small VERY vocal group of angry Unified Inventory people (same 4-5 posters). More than half their suggestions make me cringe if implemented. I hope the Devs weed out these "Uni. Inv. Fundamentalists" before their dogma becomes the Sharia Law of Eve. ...Signature... |
Corina Jarr
Spazzoid Enterprises Purpose Built
1118
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 18:29:00 -
[369] - Quote
Hustomte wrote:What I see here is a small VERY vocal group of angry Unified Inventory people (same 4-5 posters). More than half their suggestions make me cringe if implemented. I hope the Devs weed out these "Uni. Inv. Fundamentalists" before their dogma becomes the Sharia Law of Eve. There are a large number of Uni Inv angrys. They are vocal, just not all in one place.
Me, I just wish it was faster to respond. |
SportBilly
GHOSTS OF THE FIRST AND ONLY
42
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 19:13:00 -
[370] - Quote
Why is it the people who like the UI are mostly noobs, havent played the game for long or amassed large amounts of ships and materials to understand why it dosn't work. To play all aspects of the game involves a lot more than drag and drop (reasons covered in over 20 differant threads by many people) Every time i open windows i get spinning discs, its appalling.... If i use a new account with a few ships and items it's fine, if not long winded to do the same functions as before. Try mining/building stuff and running a corp rather than just pew pew and you would understand. |
|
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
549
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 20:18:00 -
[371] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Lucas Quaan wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:We would also need to compare it to other Shift functionality regarding such an 'Esc' setting, would it only apply to the Inventory, or be a global 'Make SHIFT a primary behavior' kind of thing? etc. Since SHIFT is in a very useful position on your keyboard, some of us already have it bound to other useful functions in combat situations. If anything, I would suggest having as few global shortcuts as possible to allow the player control over which keys to use. What I meant to say was: If what currently needs Shift click is changed to work without Shift click (as an option), should that be only for the Inventory or extend to other UI elements currently used by Shift click? Example would be the Overview when opening up a Cargo hold of a wreck. ( UI is an acronym for User Interface.) Try to limit the autoshift to the behavior of the inventory and all other windows. The denial and hate of "shift+click" is just a problem which came up with the unified inventory. I would really like to abandon the unified inventory and the tree view- or at least the behavior of the whole unified inventory. I want several independent windows back. Rather too much than too less. For me it would be OK that I MUST use shift+click to open a second window if I want to compare things. Or that I MUST use shift+click to lock a target from the overview. But I dislike every shift+click if it is about windows like wrecks, containers, inventory, dronebays, cargo holds etc. To make it short I want this autoshift function to have the copy of the old inventory. ALL other former shift+click shortcuts, before 22.05.2012, will be OK for me.
Addition: I have read some other posts and a very good fitting statement came from Bubanni, four posts above me.
Bubanni wrote:To give answere to this question, if you mean anything related to the Unified Inventory... then yes! :) (as long as you don't affect stuff not related to the inventory, like show info in new window or same ...) I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
Jarin Arenos
Card Shark Industries
25
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 20:44:00 -
[372] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Jarin Arenos wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:Octoven wrote:Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage So what you're saying is that camo ships should have a smaller sig radius stat to represent the greater difficulty in automatic identification and targeting? I was just joking/bad posting.. I will try and remember not to do that again Eh, I wasn't being entirely serious either. Though it'd be nice to see some sort of in-game nod to the new widespread popularity of camo schemes. It's starting to look a little... same-y. |
Rezecor
Rim Worlds Republic Solar Citizens
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 20:45:00 -
[373] - Quote
I didn't scan all 19 pages to see if somebody brought this up already, but with regards to the mining barge changes, there is one aspect of it that creates a lot of problems for those of us who use crystals. The translation of cargo space into ore hold also means a huge reduction in the amount of space to carry spare crystals. This makes crystal mining a lot more trouble as with only 500m3 in a hulk unmodified, that's realistically only enough space to carry T2 crystals for about 2 or 3 ore types which means more down time when having to switch up crystals for an ore type you don't have on hand. (i.e. warping off to get them or having a hauler bring them out to you). In effect, this change is a nerf (though not a huge one) to those who use mining crystals.
I'd like to suggest reducing the volume of mining crystals by half or more (say to something like 20m3 for T2, 15m3 for T1) to reduce the impact of the much smaller cargo hold. The other way that I wouldn't mind would be to allow mining crystals in ore holds. |
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 21:27:00 -
[374] - Quote
Rezecor wrote:I didn't scan all 19 pages to see if somebody brought this up already, but with regards to the mining barge changes, there is one aspect of it that creates a lot of problems for those of us who use crystals. The translation of cargo space into ore hold also means a huge reduction in the amount of space to carry spare crystals. This makes crystal mining a lot more trouble as with only 500m3 in a hulk unmodified, that's realistically only enough space to carry T2 crystals for about 2 or 3 ore types which means more down time when having to switch up crystals for an ore type you don't have on hand. (i.e. warping off to get them or having a hauler bring them out to you). In effect, this change is a nerf (though not a huge one) to those who use mining crystals.
I'd like to suggest reducing the volume of mining crystals by half or more (say to something like 20m3 for T2, 15m3 for T1) to reduce the impact of the much smaller cargo hold. The other way that I wouldn't mind would be to allow mining crystals in ore holds.
This! Good point... didn't think of it yet. But have them with me normally indeed. |
mkint
825
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 21:38:00 -
[375] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:mkint wrote:Also, please add to the feature request list dragging tutorials from the help tutorial list to chat. So many times i've been helping in help chat and rookie help where linking the tutorial would have saved so much time and typing. Way ahead of you, already implemented (Don't worry, karkur did it - I was too busy destroying the game to get involved.) It's actually something that I've been wanting for over a year but f&i is a joke and it isn't something the csm would care about.
Btw you are one of the more interesting devs sprinkling villainy with the occasional awesome. |
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
257
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 21:38:00 -
[376] - Quote
Hustomte wrote:What I see here is a small VERY vocal group of angry Unified Inventory people (same 4-5 posters). More than half their suggestions make me cringe if implemented. I hope the Devs weed out these "Uni. Inv. Fundamentalists" before their dogma becomes the Sharia Law of Eve.
I'm curious as to which suggestions make you want to cringe? Other than my (somewhat) joking suggestions of flogging certain developers, most suggestions I see are all about bringing back lost functionality to make it easier to use.
Also, add in an option to turn off the extraneous stuff on the inventory windows. Other than the blue bar, I'm pretty much a rabid hater of everything you added to the windows. I find the blue bar tolerable, and it's about the only extra you added in that I wouldn't sell someone else's soul to disable. |
mkint
825
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 22:34:00 -
[377] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Lucas Quaan wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:We would also need to compare it to other Shift functionality regarding such an 'Esc' setting, would it only apply to the Inventory, or be a global 'Make SHIFT a primary behavior' kind of thing? etc. Since SHIFT is in a very useful position on your keyboard, some of us already have it bound to other useful functions in combat situations. If anything, I would suggest having as few global shortcuts as possible to allow the player control over which keys to use. What I meant to say was: If what currently needs Shift click is changed to work without Shift click (as an option), should that be only for the Inventory or extend to other UI elements currently used by Shift click? Example would be the Overview when opening up a Cargo hold of a wreck. ( UI is an acronym for User Interface.) just get us as close as possible to the previous functionality please. The problem never was that there were too many windows. The problem was always that our tools to navigate them are consistently taken away in an effort to play catch up to the worst ui trends. Now you're going to have to reinvent the old tools that have been thrown away before they were obsolete. |
Rezecor
Rim Worlds Republic Solar Citizens
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 23:55:00 -
[378] - Quote
Did I miss something? Is ice mining getting nerfed?
I went over to the test server and played around a little bit with mining barge/exhumer fits. With my testing, I see about a 15percent loss in ice mining output. Here are figures I came up with. (all relevant skills to 5, ice harvester II, ice harvest upgrade II's, no orca/rorq boosts)
New Mack 178.96s/2 cube = 89.48s per cube or 40.23 cube/hr Old Mack 291.13s/4 cube = 72.78s per cube avg or 49.46 cube/hr New Hulk 248.43s/3 cube = 82.81s per cube avg or 43.47 cube/hr
Ice mining is painful enough as it is without something like this. CCP, please give us a way to compensate for this. |
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
14
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 00:21:00 -
[379] - Quote
Hustomte wrote:What I see here is a small VERY vocal group of angry Unified Inventory people (same 4-5 posters). More than half their suggestions make me cringe if implemented. I hope the Devs weed out these "Uni. Inv. Fundamentalists" before their dogma becomes the Sharia Law of Eve.
This is probably the smallest complaint thread regarding the UI. Dig around and you'll find 500+ pages spread across a dozen different threads. The number of people posting is in decline partly due to CCP doing jack **** about it and partly due to unsubbed complainers. I myself have already dropped 2 accounts. It seems they only listen when layoffs are mentioned due to decline in subs. |
Freezehunter
214
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 00:22:00 -
[380] - Quote
Rezecor wrote:Did I miss something? Is ice mining getting nerfed? I went over to the test server and played around a little bit with mining barge/exhumer fits. With my testing, I see about a 15percent loss in ice mining output. Here are figures I came up with. (all relevant skills to 5, ice harvester II, ice harvest upgrade II's, no orca/rorq boosts) New Mack 178.96s/2 cube = 89.48s per cube or 40.23 cube/hr Old Mack 291.13s/4 cube = 72.78s per cube avg or 49.46 cube/hr New Hulk 248.43s/3 cube = 82.81s per cube avg or 43.47 cube/hr Ice mining is painful enough as it is without something like this. CCP, please give us a way to compensate for this.
I thought they were adding mercoxit and Ice mining rigs. Inappropriate signature, CCP Phantom. |
|
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
179
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 01:03:00 -
[381] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:The only question that remains is, if a user opens up the Inventory from the Neocom, and is using the Index tree, will he also want that window to close when he has pressed 'Loot all' on the last wreck in the index tree?
Is it possible to base the behavior on whether or not the index tree is expanded? For example, if it's minimized (like when you're looting in space), the button text changes to "Loot / Close." This would allow you to solve both scenarios while being clear on function. Occasionally plays sober |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
1092
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 01:53:00 -
[382] - Quote
Hustomte wrote:What I see here is a small VERY vocal group of angry Unified Inventory people (same 4-5 posters). More than half their suggestions make me cringe if implemented. I hope the Devs weed out these "Uni. Inv. Fundamentalists" before their dogma becomes the Sharia Law of Eve.
The rest of us gave our reasoned and measured responses to the unified inventory during the few weeks after it hit Sisi. Now we're just disgusted by the whole process, the fact that CCP's development model is screwed up enough that they had to push it live even though it wasn't ready, and the just bad design of it at the core.
The new unified inventory is garbage. It starts from the flawed assumption that all of your inventory locations shoved into a single window is a good idea.
Then there's the stupidity that drag and drop operations will change your focus point within the tree if you linger too long over the tree portion of the window. If I'm dragging and dropping things, one can safely assume that I have *other* things that I'm planning on dragging and dropping from the source location. Therefore the focus should never be changed until I manually click on the new location in the tree view.
This is especially annoying because of the lag caused by the unified inventory, which means that during a drag-n-drop operation you have to go *slow* in order to make sure that the right slot in the tree lights up before you release the drop. Which, of course, causes the window focus to change to the spot that you just dropped stuff into. Now you have to navigate your way back to where you started and figure out what you were trying to sort out.
There's the flawed assumption that a tree is a good UI element. Tree views work fine, but *only* if the window is very tall. In shorter windows where you can only see 5-8 tree items at a time, trees become a very poor UI choice. Which goes back to the flawed choice that putting everything into a single tree is a good idea. Those trees should have been left segregated by location type (ships go in one window, your personal hangar and personal containers in another window, your corp hangar in a 3rd window). Then you would only have 5-10 elements in the tree, so even on a short and wide inventory window, the tree would still be useful. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1462
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 02:32:00 -
[383] - Quote
just dropping this here since it's a unified inventory discussion
http://images.six.betanews.com/screenshots/945901171-1.png a rogue goon |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1464
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 03:34:00 -
[384] - Quote
also using the middle mouse button on an element in the unified inventory should open a new window
just sayin a rogue goon |
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
179
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 03:38:00 -
[385] - Quote
Ha ha. This is like... Unified Everything.
Index > Space > Ships > Current Ship > Modules > High Slots > Weapons > Large Mega Pulse Laser > Action > Fire (Your capacitor is empty)? Occasionally plays sober |
Fenria Del'tore
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 03:45:00 -
[386] - Quote
Rezecor wrote:Did I miss something? Is ice mining getting nerfed? I went over to the test server and played around a little bit with mining barge/exhumer fits. With my testing, I see about a 15percent loss in ice mining output. Here are figures I came up with. (all relevant skills to 5, ice harvester II, ice harvest upgrade II's, no orca/rorq boosts) New Mack 178.96s/2 cube = 89.48s per cube or 40.23 cube/hr Old Mack 291.13s/4 cube = 72.78s per cube avg or 49.46 cube/hr New Hulk 248.43s/3 cube = 82.81s per cube avg or 43.47 cube/hr Ice mining is painful enough as it is without something like this. CCP, please give us a way to compensate for this.
You missed the ice mining rigs. Put those on and retest.
|
Sabrina Solette
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 05:00:00 -
[387] - Quote
What the **** were you thinking with the pirate ship changes.
The Dramiel, the main small ship I fly, why change it, the size was perfect as it was. It seems to be change for changes sake. Looks like I'll have to look for something else to fly now. Although there's nothing that even comes close to the Dramiel before you expanded it.
Very unhappy about this.
The patterns on the pirate ships, what were you thinking yet again. I thought I had some decent ships some of the best looking ships in the game and now you're turning them into a f****** dairy herd.
Strike two, very unhappy yet again.
Come on CCP don't make changes for changes sake. |
Sabrina Solette
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 05:26:00 -
[388] - Quote
R0ze wrote:I don't understand the concept of camouflage skins in space (ok I know I'm way too late since navy mega and the rest allready got theirs) but still.. What is the reason? Hide between asteriods?
Totally pointless, it's not like there's any trees or bushes or rocks to help break up the shape of the ship (asteroids don't really count unless you intend to spend all you time in an asteroid field). In fact camouflage patterns are more likely to make the ship stand out as camouflage is supposed to make you blend into the back ground.
Maybe CCP intends to make them ugly so that you have to pay for a ship skin just to make them look half decent again. |
Silath Slyver Silverpine
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
36
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 05:42:00 -
[389] - Quote
In regards to no longer being able to carry a variety of crystals with the Hulk's new cargo bay:
Just make the crystals smaller, eh? 50m3 is pretty large, actually, when compared to the size of similar items. For example, large pulse laser crystals are only 1m3. Perhaps mining crystals were made huge for balancing reasons, but frankly it just seems like adding a bit of needless tedium?
Anyway, that way you could keep the hulk's bay at 500m3 and still let people carry the crystals they need for convenience. |
xXThunder StruckXx
Shadows of Uranus
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 07:50:00 -
[390] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:xXThunder StruckXx wrote:Could you please let us know what is happening to the crimewatch changes? Have they been scrapped , withheld again?
Any update would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you. Still in ongoing development, we were never expecting to ship any additional changes in this release.
Thank you for the response Greyscale |
|
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Elysian Empire
170
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 07:53:00 -
[391] - Quote
Is eve a modern fps now? Is that why every god damn ship is brown? ffs |
Adrian Dixon
Arbitrary Spaceship Destruction -affliction-
60
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 08:37:00 -
[392] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote: We will look into this behavior, the assumption was that players that only loot one wreck at a time would want to see that it went into the Cargo hold once the 'Loot All' button was pressed. But if the Ship's Cargo hold is empty however, we have now observed users thinking nothing happened because they see no change in the content area of the Inventory window and sometimes they might not notice the focus change in the Index tree, or simply have the Index tree minimized, so this needs addressing I agree. The action should simply close the cargo window once the cargo container is empty, if the user opened a cargo container directly (as a secondary inventory window).
The only question that remains is, if a user opens up the Inventory from the Neocom, and is using the Index tree, will he also want that window to close when he has pressed 'Loot all' on the last wreck in the index tree?
Adding "Loot All" under the right click menu when right clicking a wreck/can/etc would be great especialy for noctis pilots. This would save even having to opening any windows. |
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
95
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 10:46:00 -
[393] - Quote
Thanks everyone for your feedback regarding the Shift discussion. As pointed out here, there already is a setting in the Esc Menu related to reverting Shift behavior, so it might make sense to have this behavior tied with that setting. Hopefully those that already use that setting will also want the Inventory Shift function to be reverted.
Jett0 wrote:Is it possible to base the behavior on whether or not the index tree is expanded? For example, if it's minimized (like when you're looting in space), the button text changes to "Loot / Close." This would allow you to solve both scenarios while being clear on function.
Interesting point, this would solve it very gracefully. I have added it to our Iteration plan, thank you. CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
Lord Helghast
Dirty Old Bastards Nulli Secunda
104
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 11:35:00 -
[394] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Thanks everyone for your feedback regarding the Shift discussion. As pointed out here, there already is a setting in the Esc Menu related to reverting Shift behavior, so it might make sense to have this behavior tied with that setting. Hopefully those that already use that setting will also want the Inventory Shift function to be reverted. Jett0 wrote:Is it possible to base the behavior on whether or not the index tree is expanded? For example, if it's minimized (like when you're looting in space), the button text changes to "Loot / Close." This would allow you to solve both scenarios while being clear on function. Interesting point, this would solve it very gracefully. I have added it to our Iteration plan, thank you.
See us players can be useful lol |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
556
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 11:59:00 -
[395] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Thanks everyone for your feedback regarding the Shift discussion. As pointed out here, there already is a setting in the Esc Menu related to reverting Shift behavior, so it might make sense to have this behavior tied with that setting. Hopefully those that already use that setting will also want the Inventory Shift function to be reverted. Jett0 wrote:Is it possible to base the behavior on whether or not the index tree is expanded? For example, if it's minimized (like when you're looting in space), the button text changes to "Loot / Close." This would allow you to solve both scenarios while being clear on function. Interesting point, this would solve it very gracefully. I have added it to our Iteration plan, thank you.
UH! I hope you do not mean the GÇ£Merge GÇ£ItemsGÇ¥ and GÇ£ShipsGÇ¥ into station panelGÇ¥ checkbox on the General Settings Tab of the ESC Menu. I know this checkbox. But it is absolute no solution because after checking it - ALL windows are really merged into the station panel. THIS is absolute not helpful. Helpful would only free moveable windows. Not a collection of tabs within the station panel. Station panel has nothing to do with inventory or windows.
Please do not try to exchange "Unified" with "Merged".
The idea to bound a window to something that not belongs to, would not be an improvement. You should spare your development time and bring just the autoshift to open seperate and independent windows. Never bound a window on something. Just own windows, adjustable in size and position. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
Reginald Zebranky
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 13:18:00 -
[396] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote: [...] because I at least have been making some changes to saved fittings).
Oh God! are the saved-fittings changes coming in this patch? I love you. I love you sooooo much!
Any chance the load-saved-fittings bugs have been fixed too? When modules or drones glitch during fitting-loading it is ever so irritating.
|
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2824
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 14:28:00 -
[397] - Quote
Reginald Zebranky wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote: [...] because I at least have been making some changes to saved fittings). Oh God! are the saved-fittings changes coming in this patch? I love you. I love you sooooo much! Any chance the load-saved-fittings bugs have been fixed too? When modules or drones glitch during fitting-loading it is ever so irritating.
yes they are! do you think I should write a micro dev blog on it next week when I get back from vacation so everybody notices?
I don't know what but you're talking about, unfortunately, but I can take a look on Monday if there's already a bug report on it?
<3 u too random man on the internet Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
98
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 14:31:00 -
[398] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote:I hope you do not mean the GÇ£Merge GÇ£ItemsGÇ¥ and GÇ£ShipsGÇ¥ into station panelGÇ¥ checkbox on the General Settings Tab of the ESC Menu. No, it's this one:
ESC Menu under "General Settings - Windows" "Try to Use Existing Info Window if Any (Except if Shift is Pressed)"
We would need to change the description for the setting toggle though, to describe better what it's doing regarding Shift click.
Something along the line of: "Require SHIFT be pressed to open a new window (applies to Show Info and Inventory folders)" CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1476
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 15:36:00 -
[399] - Quote
Jett0 wrote:Ha ha. This is like... Unified Everything. Index > Space > Ships > Current Ship > Modules > High Slots > Weapons > Large Mega Pulse Laser > Action > Fire (Your capacitor is empty)?
basically, imagine having your assets in Amarr open on the left side and your assets in Jita open on the right
you drag one of your stacks in Amarr to the right and it opens a courier contract prompt
~the possibilities~ EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
557
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 15:45:00 -
[400] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:I hope you do not mean the GÇ£Merge GÇ£ItemsGÇ¥ and GÇ£ShipsGÇ¥ into station panelGÇ¥ checkbox on the General Settings Tab of the ESC Menu. No, it's this one: ESC Menu under "General Settings - Windows" "Try to Use Existing Info Window if Any (Except if Shift is Pressed)" We would need to change the description for the setting toggle though, to describe better what it's doing regarding Shift click. Something along the line of: "Require SHIFT be pressed to open a new window (applies to Show Info and Inventory folders)"
Ah! Thank you for your explanation CCP Arrow. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
|
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
37
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 20:58:00 -
[401] - Quote
1: The hulk needs a bit bigger ore hold (doesn't have to be much) 2: Change one ore mining amount bonus to a cycle time bonus. 3: Improve the capacitor generation a bit to cushion the extra energy use caused by a faster cycle time.
Especially point 2 will make it more distinct from the other ships in that it takes many smaller bites, instead of a few large chunks. This makes it less prone to ore hold overrun that would otherwise be a serious issue and also enables it to mine activity with less ore yield loss because there is only half a cycle left in a rock.
Obviously, it will chew trough crystals faster, so give it a bit more cargo hold then the Mackinaw.
Otherwise, as things stand, there hardly ever will be a sane reason to use a Hulk, given the advantages the Mackinaw has over the Hulk. |
mkint
830
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 21:16:00 -
[402] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:I hope you do not mean the GÇ£Merge GÇ£ItemsGÇ¥ and GÇ£ShipsGÇ¥ into station panelGÇ¥ checkbox on the General Settings Tab of the ESC Menu. No, it's this one: ESC Menu under "General Settings - Windows" "Try to Use Existing Info Window if Any (Except if Shift is Pressed)" We would need to change the description for the setting toggle though, to describe better what it's doing regarding Shift click. Something along the line of: "Require SHIFT be pressed to open a new window (applies to Show Info and Inventory folders)" you're doing it again. You're breaking existing functionality for no good reason. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 23:21:00 -
[403] - Quote
Udl - CCP continuing to slather makeup on a pig. Static windows for in station operations - that's all that's needed. UdI was trying to solve a problem that actually exists in the Assets UI. |
Wiu Ming
Dead Guy Syndicate
13
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 00:48:00 -
[404] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote: The broader solution to all this is for people to stop imagining they have a perfect grasp of the minutate [sic] of EVE development and holding individual developers personally accountable for development decisions and outcomes. Nobody, from Hellmar and Unifex down, gets to make decisions completely unilaterally...
I'd like to vote for new roles/powers for Punkturis, specifically enabling her to make decisions about EVE completely unilaterally.
Warmest Regards, |
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
180
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 01:00:00 -
[405] - Quote
Inspiration wrote:Otherwise, as things stand, there hardly ever will be a sane reason to use a Hulk, given the advantages the Mackinaw has over the Hulk.
The way a miner friend of mine put it, the Hulk becomes worse for solo mining but better for fleet mining.
mkint wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:"Require SHIFT be pressed to open a new window (applies to Show Info and Inventory folders)" you're doing it again. You're breaking existing functionality for no good reason.
Isn't this just extending what that option applies to? What does it break?
CCP Punkturis wrote:do you think I should write a micro dev blog on it next week when I get back from vacation so everybody notices?
Something that might improve communication is more micro-devblogs. A lot of forum rage could be prevented with this. Even a locked thread saying "No, we haven't forgotten about x" every now and then would help. I think a lot of recent Unified Inventory rage came from the fact that dev blogs were being pushed on it, then suddenly they just stopped. In other words, yes, publish it!
I notice Team Avatar are still waiting for theirs to be approved by CCP Unifex. Granted, vacations/sickness will slow things down, but wouldn't it be better if approval was only required by team leads (assuming that's not how it's done currently)? Occasionally plays sober |
darmwand
Repo.
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 02:11:00 -
[406] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:"Require SHIFT be pressed to open a new window (applies to Show Info and Inventory folders)"
Just make sure that it doesn't apply to guns, too... darmwand Repossession Agent http://www.repo-corp.net/ Recruitment is OPEN |
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
262
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 03:02:00 -
[407] - Quote
Jett0 wrote: Something that might improve communication is more micro-devblogs. A lot of forum rage could be prevented with this. Even a locked thread saying "No, we haven't forgotten about x" every now and then would help. I think a lot of recent Unified Inventory rage came from the fact that dev blogs were being pushed on it, then suddenly they just stopped. In other words, yes, publish it!
I notice Team Avatar are still waiting for theirs to be approved by CCP Unifex. Granted, vacations/sickness will slow things down, but wouldn't it be better if approval was only required by team leads (assuming that's not how it's done currently)?
No. Even when they blogged about it, we still raged at them. Doubt that's gonna change. The rage has quite a great deal to do with the off hand way that every concern about it was waved off as us "not giving it a chance". Go look up the original thread. It starts out with a bunch of "Wow! That's cool!". Then the day it's released on the test server, you see a bunch of "Holy ****! What is this abomination!?!?"
Of course, being on the test server, people expect garbage, and thus, it wasn't really rage, just pointing out that it sucked. Following that was a great deal of suggestions that would have made the system workable (ignoring the lag issues). Then one of the dev's posts in the thread "Goes live on Inferno next week!" and the rest of the thread is everyone who tested it BEGGING CCP to not release it because it wasn't ready. THAT is why there is such a level of hatred. They didn't bother to fix it when they knew it was a broken pile of ****.
Also, really doesn't help that the most requested features are simply a return of lost shortcuts. That **** should have been hotfixed in same ******* day. It's a god damn short cut. Is your code REALLY that ****** up that you can't bring back shortcuts in the right click menu and neocom? Why the insistence that we use the damn tree to navigate when using the neocom shortcuts and right click menu are more natural AND what the player base is used to? You even bury the damn neocom shortcuts so you don't confuse the new players, and the rest of us will just simply remove the Inventory from our neocom, and put back item hangar/ship hanger and whatever else we want. |
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
183
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 04:00:00 -
[408] - Quote
Jonuts wrote:Some good things, with asterisks!
To clarify, I'll emphasize the word "recently." There was the initial rage, which died down a bit as they pushed the weekly update devblogs. Then they stopped, and a few wondered if they were "done" with Unified Inventory. My point is, if the devs don't have time for a full devblog, even a small one would be nice to let us know important features and fixes are being worked on.
For example, you know what I'd like to see? A post/blog with "Yes, we're still looking at making low-sec/mercenaries/piracy awesome like you wanted, but other things have priority right now. No idea when we'll come back to it."
Your points about the test server feedback are entirely valid, but that's a different issue. If the hand-wave attitude you mention is true, that tells me they need to make Singularity easier to access and get more players on it. You might counter that with "or they could just listen to the feedback in the first place," but I have a feeling they've had players complain about test features before that released just fine (no proof, mind you, just MMO communities in general).
Lots of feedback from a few players at best proves that a few players are very passionate about that feature/change. Trying to take that feedback and turn it into a cross-section of the entire population is a practice that forms entire university majors.
When they make mistakes like this, I just remind myself that Incarna gave us Crucible. Occasionally plays sober |
mkint
835
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 06:53:00 -
[409] - Quote
Jett0 wrote:mkint wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:"Require SHIFT be pressed to open a new window (applies to Show Info and Inventory folders)" you're doing it again. You're breaking existing functionality for no good reason. Isn't this just extending what that option applies to? What does it break?
Having 1 checkbox for 2 things that are completely unrelated? How is that extending anything?
This is another example of why this particular dev shouldn't be allowed to touch UI stuff. He has no concept of usability and workflow. Has he even ever played EVE? You know, just to see what all the hubbub is about?
Do you use your show-info windows the same way you use inventory windows? Do you use your inventory windows the same way you use show-info windows?
Why in the ever loving hell should they be forced to behave the same way, when they don't have a goddamned thing to do with one another? 1 checkbox? Are you freakin' kidding me? |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
37
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 10:24:00 -
[410] - Quote
SOMONE ******* REPEAIR THIS FORUM ALREADY, MORONS!
THIS IS LIKE THE 10th TIME, THE AUTO-SAVE FEATURE CAUSED ME TO NOT POST MY ACTUAL POST BUT SUBMITTING SOMETHING VERY VERY OLD. THUS LOOSING 30 MINUTES OF CAREFUL ARTICULATION TO MAKE A POINT ACROSS.
YOU INCOMPETENT FUCKTARDS, NO WONDER EVERYTHING GOES TO HELL!
WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND PUTS AUTOSAVE MESSAGES OVER THE VERY TEXT YOUR TYPING...FIRE THAT GUY... IMMEDIATELY! |
|
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
37
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 10:29:00 -
[411] - Quote
Jett0 wrote:Inspiration wrote:Otherwise, as things stand, there hardly ever will be a sane reason to use a Hulk, given the advantages the Mackinaw has over the Hulk. The way a miner friend of mine put it, the Hulk becomes worse for solo mining but better for fleet mining.
I wonder what makes him say this as the only thing improved on the Hulk is a bit of EHP. All other metrics have gone down, including yield, crystal storage and not at least the ore storage. It is even worse in signature size i think, so takes more damage from bigger rats...but I have to re-check this as I can't be sure form memory.
To sum it up, it is worse off in every category but a bit of EHP and then not even a whole lot of EHP unless a Damage Control II is fitted.In which case, the extra mining output is clearly degraded to a point, the Mackinaw starts to make more sense with all its advantages, even the Skiff becomes e more sensible option then.
I wonder where the delusion originated from that making a ship more vulnerable then it's alternatives, will make it an ideal fleet ship. Sure it mines 15% more then a like fitted Mackinaw, but in practice for micro management reasons this gap will be quite a bit smaller and the clear Advantages of the Mackinaw make more sense in fleet scenario's.
No mining ship will work indefinably when solo in a hostile environment, not even combat ships do, which kind of makes the fleet angle irrelevant really. And logistics wise, all mining ships need logistical backing for serious mining, anywhere, which comes form a fleet.
In my book, the new Hulk is actually the best no-backup, no fleet bonus, high sec solo mining ship. As only then does it's small ore hold and like crystal storage not matter much and will it have a clear sensible mining amount advantage over the Mackinaw. In all other situations it is the dumb choice.
|
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
186
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 10:52:00 -
[412] - Quote
mkint wrote:Do you use your show-info windows the same way you use inventory windows?
In my case, yes. But I see your point. Separate options would be better.
CCP Arrow, thanks for the reply. If you're still following:
Several devs have said that making certain features optional is impossible. I assume they're thinking from more of a codebase standpoint. The fact is, Uni-Inv is already kind of "half-optional" because of the tree minimize button. With that in mind, the following would be a good start to marrying the old and the new.
- Bring back all station Neocom buttons and right-click options. Don't worry about redundant functions. The new Neocom is customizable, and right-click is assumed to have most if not all functions for an object anyway.
- The tree would be minimized by default, with the exception of the actual Neocom Inventory button.
- Opening a container/inventory would always be its own window by default. If we want to use a single window, we can expand the tree view on a current one.
- The tree view would scroll when dragging an object near the top or bottom.
- The current container would never change unless you actually left-click it in the tree view.
- Each inventory type (wreck, cargo, station, etc.) will have a reference for window position and size. If you open a container, then move it, the referenced dimensions change accordingly. However, if you expand the tree and change the active container, the reference becomes null. This way, you can't accidently change any window settings that you didn't start with. In addition, the Inventory button would have its own referenced set apart from the others.
Occasionally plays sober |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
555
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 12:20:00 -
[413] - Quote
<3 new Angel V3, the old one was ok but a little bit "old", this new V3 is simply awesome, thx brb |
Scaugh
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
24
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 12:38:00 -
[414] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Callidus Dux wrote: *snip* Furthermore it is annoying that the window for a wreck changes to the ship's cargo hold after looting. It must close itself. The seperate looting window must close itself after looting.
I have filed a defect on this after talking with CCP Arrow
This is the single biggest pain the rear end feature of the clickfest that is the new and unimproved UI |
Nalha Saldana
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
281
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 13:00:00 -
[415] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:Reginald Zebranky wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote: [...] because I at least have been making some changes to saved fittings). Oh God! are the saved-fittings changes coming in this patch? I love you. I love you sooooo much! Any chance the load-saved-fittings bugs have been fixed too? When modules or drones glitch during fitting-loading it is ever so irritating. yes they are! do you think I should write a micro dev blog on it next week when I get back from vacation so everybody notices? I don't know what but you're talking about, unfortunately, but I can take a look on Monday if there's already a bug report on it? <3 u too random man on the internet
Are all the bugs with T3s and saved fits with different subsystems fixed? Thats just soooo broken atm. |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2869
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 13:35:00 -
[416] - Quote
Nalha Saldana wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:Reginald Zebranky wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote: [...] because I at least have been making some changes to saved fittings). Oh God! are the saved-fittings changes coming in this patch? I love you. I love you sooooo much! Any chance the load-saved-fittings bugs have been fixed too? When modules or drones glitch during fitting-loading it is ever so irritating. yes they are! do you think I should write a micro dev blog on it next week when I get back from vacation so everybody notices? I don't know what but you're talking about, unfortunately, but I can take a look on Monday if there's already a bug report on it? <3 u too random man on the internet Are all the bugs with T3s and saved fits with different subsystems fixed? Thats just soooo broken atm.
I don't know which bugs you are talking about either.. maybe you can give me a better description of what's broken and then I can look into it on Monday and see if it's been bug reported and/or fixed yet
(I've been on vacation for 4 weeks so I don't know what's been happening at the office for a while) Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
361
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 13:43:00 -
[417] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:Nalha Saldana wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:Reginald Zebranky wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote: [...] because I at least have been making some changes to saved fittings). Oh God! are the saved-fittings changes coming in this patch? I love you. I love you sooooo much! Any chance the load-saved-fittings bugs have been fixed too? When modules or drones glitch during fitting-loading it is ever so irritating. yes they are! do you think I should write a micro dev blog on it next week when I get back from vacation so everybody notices? I don't know what but you're talking about, unfortunately, but I can take a look on Monday if there's already a bug report on it? <3 u too random man on the internet Are all the bugs with T3s and saved fits with different subsystems fixed? Thats just soooo broken atm. I don't know which bugs you are talking about either.. maybe you can give me a better description of what's broken and then I can look into it on Monday and see if it's been bug reported and/or fixed yet (I've been on vacation for 4 weeks so I don't know what's been happening at the office for a while)
Still not fixed on Sisi. A bug with CPU and Power grid checks does not allow subsystems to online in some instances BR 133243, 133235
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
361
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 13:46:00 -
[418] - Quote
For those with this issue create a new saved fitting which seems to work but the original saved fitting does not. |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
37
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 14:55:00 -
[419] - Quote
Inspiration wrote:*snip* Post Constructive Feedback in the right Forum or do not post.
Fixed your insulting and off topic post ISD Dosnix
Pretty mad after loosing a major post (again) at CCP's hands in the form of bad forum design and/or code...and in full my right to be. Your reply is all but constructive itself and humanly translates to:
* I don't understand; * I don't really care much either; * Make no fuss on my turf or shut up.
It's insulting to me, exactly the thing you blame me for! And since when are hard critics insulting?
I will post under bugs too, but I really want you to understand this! |
|
ISD TYPE40
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
29
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 15:28:00 -
[420] - Quote
Thread cleaned of trolling and personal attacks. Please keep your posting relevant and respectful, thank you.
Trolling and personal attacks removed - ISD Type40. ISD Type40 Ensign Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
Lord Vyper
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 16:47:00 -
[421] - Quote
Inspiration wrote:Jett0 wrote:Inspiration wrote:Otherwise, as things stand, there hardly ever will be a sane reason to use a Hulk, given the advantages the Mackinaw has over the Hulk. The way a miner friend of mine put it, the Hulk becomes worse for solo mining but better for fleet mining. I wonder what makes him say this as the only thing improved on the Hulk is a bit of EHP. All other metrics have gone down, including yield, crystal storage and not at least the ore storage. It is even worse in signature size i think, so takes more damage from bigger rats...but I have to re-check this as I can't be sure form memory. To sum it up, it is worse off in every category but a bit of EHP and then not even a whole lot of EHP unless a Damage Control II is fitted.In which case, the extra mining output is clearly degraded to a point, the Mackinaw starts to make more sense with all its advantages, even the Skiff becomes e more sensible option then. I wonder where the delusion originated from that making a ship more vulnerable then it's alternatives, will make it an ideal fleet ship. Sure it mines 15% more then a like fitted Mackinaw, but in practice for micro management reasons this gap will be quite a bit smaller and the clear Advantages of the Mackinaw make more sense in fleet scenario's. No mining ship will work indefinably when solo in a hostile environment, not even combat ships do, which kind of makes the fleet angle irrelevant really. And logistics wise, all mining ships need logistical backing for serious mining, anywhere, which comes from a fleet. In my book, the new Hulk is actually the best no-backup, no fleet bonus, high sec solo mining ship. As only then does it's small ore hold and like crystal storage not matter much and will it have a clear sensible mining amount advantage over the Mackinaw. In all other situations it is the dumb choice.
15% multiplies out in a fleet quite well. And will give you considerably more output in a fleet than a group of mack's in equal number. For corps that want to get the most mining done in the fastest time such as probed sites or valuable pockets this is the best option. 3 mining lasers allows you to pull from 3 roids instead of 2 which can be very useful. In your book is an opinion and only that. Everyone has their own strategies on how to min/max. If you have secure space be it high, low or nullsec the hulk will still be your best option for eating roids. 10 hulks vs 10 mack's 150% output difference at a minimum. If your worried about being attacked the other options begin to have more appeal, but if not the hulk is still best option number wise. |
Cyprus Amaro
Tortuga Coalition 102
9
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 16:48:00 -
[422] - Quote
Inspiration wrote: In my book, the new Hulk is actually the best no-backup, no fleet bonus, high sec solo mining ship. As only then does it's small ore hold and like crystal storage not matter much and will it have a clear sensible mining amount advantage over the Mackinaw. In all other situations it is the dumb choice.
I'm thinking the new Mac will be the best solo, unsupported ship. It will have better shield and armor tanks than the Hulk and an Ore hold 3 times the size. Sure, the Mac won't have quite the yield, but that is made up quickly by having to fly back and forth to the station a lot less often.
One of my toons does a lot of solo mining now in a Hulk. I may switch to a Mac for that in the future.
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
362
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 17:57:00 -
[423] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Thanks everyone for your feedback regarding the Shift discussion. As pointed out here, there already is a setting in the Esc Menu related to reverting Shift behavior, so it might make sense to have this behavior tied with that setting. Hopefully those that already use that setting will also want the Inventory Shift function to be reverted. Jett0 wrote:Is it possible to base the behavior on whether or not the index tree is expanded? For example, if it's minimized (like when you're looting in space), the button text changes to "Loot / Close." This would allow you to solve both scenarios while being clear on function. Interesting point, this would solve it very gracefully. I have added it to our Iteration plan, thank you. Any update on the Orca corp inventory being openable from right click again. Thanks |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
37
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 18:14:00 -
[424] - Quote
Lord Vyper wrote:15% multiplies out in a fleet quite well. And will give you considerably more output in a fleet than a group of mack's in equal number. For corps that want to get the most mining done in the fastest time such as probed sites or valuable pockets this is the best option. 3 mining lasers allows you to pull from 3 roids instead of 2 which can be very useful. In your book is an opinion and only that. Everyone has their own strategies on how to min/max. If you have secure space be it high, low or nullsec the hulk will still be your best option for eating roids. 10 hulks vs 10 mack's 150% output difference at a minimum. If your worried about being attacked the other options begin to have more appeal, but if not the hulk is still best option number wise.
The 15.5% more mining (theoretical number in a perfect world), you will never get, not even close to. And 10 Hulks vs 10 Mackinaws in this perfect numerical world is still just 15% more, not magically 150%!
Explained I already did that the fleet factor is irrelevant (not to mention bogus), but when choosing the max yield per minute setups a fleet will hurt the hulk in a negative way as its small ore hold will block yield if not emptied rapidly and consistently. And be honest, when speaking of fleet mining we nearly always talk about some guy controlling 3 or more accounts, maybe with a buddy or two doing the same. Not at all, the one player per ship in a fleet of many, most people seem to fantasize about. Micromanagement will be a limiting factor here, especially in a fleet!
Then there is the situation that there IS a risk of getting killed (lets assume high sec for now). In a hulk you likely will not risk a second 5% implant. In a Mackinaw you suddenly can...if you are a dedicated miner, else price wise it wont make sense. The theoretical yield advantage per minute of the Hulk with a DC II + MLU over a Mackinaw with 3 MLU (yes new version has 3 low slots) then shrinks to just 6%. At this point the hulk still is a far cry from the EHP of the Mackinaw and still has to work with the ore hold limitation, be it less of an issue now its yield per minute dropped a bit.
The difference between theory and practice will most likely be even smaller as no one can mine perfectly, but doing so is a hell of a lot easier with the Mackinaw! The ore hold issue is of more concern then the mining an already depleted rock issue which will only be detected at the end of a cycle (unless you active scan and intervene..which is easier with less rocks to keep track of).
My plea to change the Hulk's Exhumer bonus form a 3% more ore yield per level to a 3% reduced cycle time and energy use per level (as it works with ice) actually addresses both issues in one easy change. The ore hold is less critical (stores two cycles) and the smaller yield per cycle means less of the cycle time is wasted, reducing the need to micromanage so many rocks.
As is, I doubt many will find a small 6% difference enough justification to choose the Hulk over the Mackinaw. Well, not if they actually ran the numbers as I just did and start to weight the pro's and cons. There will be exceptions, as always, due to personal preference or just failing at math, but there is a LOT of benefit to using a Mackinaw here.
And when you don't like to mine with drones, and many never use them, the lesser drone capability of the Skiff matters less and it will become more attractive. Yield wise however, the gap is bigger, thus the Mackinaw will be viewed as a sweet compromise by many I expect. |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
37
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 18:44:00 -
[425] - Quote
Cyprus Amaro wrote:Inspiration wrote: In my book, the new Hulk is actually the best no-backup, no fleet bonus, high sec solo mining ship. As only then does it's small ore hold and like crystal storage not matter much and will it have a clear sensible mining amount advantage over the Mackinaw. In all other situations it is the dumb choice.
I'm thinking the new Mac will be the best solo, unsupported ship. It will have better shield and armor tanks than the Hulk and an Ore hold 3 times the size. Sure, the Mac won't have quite the yield, but that is made up quickly by having to fly back and forth to the station a lot less often. One of my toons does a lot of solo mining now in a Hulk. I may switch to a Mac for that in the future.
Not sure if docking every 31.5k m3 to empty ore bay is as effective as mining 190k m3 in Jetcans and then switching to an Orca for pickup. If you own an alt on the same account, you can even have the Orca at the same belt, you just log off for a sec and log the other character in to scoop up. Drop off at station, warp back to belt and repeat.
But not everyone has a second character however, but since mining bonuses and logistics are so important to the profession, joining an industrial corporation is the best thing to do in such a situation. All that time spend doing logistics on your own to sell the ore at good profit, could have been spend mining with bonuses instead with much of the time consuming/costly work being handled for you.
It is one of the reasons the logic applied to the re-balance doesn't really stick that well to the practical in-game considerations you have to make. Most of the effectiveness of an miner does not so much come from his ship and trained skills, but from:
* Teaming up / multi-boxing for bonuses and scale advantages * Limit the waste of setup time by having perfect warp in bookmarks at belts (also affect drone effectiveness) * Working form lush locations,where risks are minimal and fitting for max yield makes more sense. * Scanning and active toggling strip miners on/off based on the numbers from the scan result. * Setting up a good logistics plan, involving mineral compression for easy and efficient hauling. * Mine the right mix or ores, based on both how you can compress the minerals form the ore and the current mineral prices.
These things matter much more then if you get 15.5% theoretical better yield per minute. It is weird to see one mining ship as a fleet sheep and the rest as for solo mining. The real distinctions simply don't run along those lines. |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
362
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 18:51:00 -
[426] - Quote
Not sure if docking every 31.5k m3 to empty ore bay is as effective as mining 190k m3 in Jetcans and then switching to an Orca for pickup. If you own an alt on the same account, you can even have the Orca at the same belt, you just log off for a sec and log the other character in to scoop up. Drop off at station, warp back to belt and repeat.
But not everyone has a second character however, but since mining bonuses and logistics are so important to the profession, joining an industrial corporation is the best thing to do in such a situation. All that time spend doing logistics on your own to sell the ore at good profit, could have been spend mining with bonuses instead with much of the time consuming/costly work being handled for you.[
This reason alone is the reason we will never have quick change characters selection under the same log in screen |
Selvedar Miromme
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 20:43:00 -
[427] - Quote
hmm... so far my only complaint about the Unified Inventory is that it doesn't automatically close when i undock... and it is a bit laggy.
other than that, not too bad.
thanks. |
El'essar Viocragh
Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik Corium Fission
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 22:19:00 -
[428] - Quote
Jett0 wrote:Inspiration wrote:Otherwise, as things stand, there hardly ever will be a sane reason to use a Hulk, given the advantages the Mackinaw has over the Hulk. The way a miner friend of mine put it, the Hulk becomes worse for solo mining but better for fleet mining.
No, group mining in general takes a nerf with 1.2.
Currently a tank fitted hulk (em ward amp II, 2x SSE II, Inv II, DC II, PDS II, MATSR I, MCDFE I) has shield resists of 79 / 78 / 78 / 79 and ingame EHP of 23'003 without any gang modifiers. The same fit on Sisi currently achieves 24'119 EHP which looks like a small boost, especially since a lot of those EHP moved from hull and armor over to shields.
But since exhumers lost their t2 base resists, this fit now has shield resists of 75 / 73 / 73 / 78, meaning remote rep from properly set up teamplay now has to counter the damage from an average resist of 74,75% instead of 78.5%. In other words, 25.25% incoming damage instead of 21.5%, a 17% increase of damage taken.
This is the case for all three exhumers, it is just most clearly visible on the hulk since it is the only one that got nil in return, making the new version all-around plain worse than the current. Who would have thought we'd see an exhumer nerf?
CCP::2012 has no interest in risk (or comparable loss) for suicide gankers, or rewards for smart and proper teamplay with player interaction. All it wants are SOMA fed masses of Epsilons keeping the world state^W^W^Weconomy running. |
Cyprus Amaro
Tortuga Coalition 102
9
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 22:29:00 -
[429] - Quote
Inspiration wrote:Cyprus Amaro wrote:Inspiration wrote: In my book, the new Hulk is actually the best no-backup, no fleet bonus, high sec solo mining ship. As only then does it's small ore hold and like crystal storage not matter much and will it have a clear sensible mining amount advantage over the Mackinaw. In all other situations it is the dumb choice.
I'm thinking the new Mac will be the best solo, unsupported ship. It will have better shield and armor tanks than the Hulk and an Ore hold 3 times the size. Sure, the Mac won't have quite the yield, but that is made up quickly by having to fly back and forth to the station a lot less often. One of my toons does a lot of solo mining now in a Hulk. I may switch to a Mac for that in the future. Not sure if docking every 31.5k m3 to empty ore bay is as effective as mining 190k m3 in Jetcans and then switching to an Orca for pickup. If you own an alt on the same account, you can even have the Orca at the same belt, you just log off for a sec and log the other character in to scoop up. Drop off at station, warp back to belt and repeat. But not everyone has a second character however, but since mining bonuses and logistics are so important to the profession, joining an industrial corporation is the best thing to do in such a situation. All that time spend doing logistics on your own to sell the ore at good profit, could have been spend mining with bonuses instead with much of the time consuming/costly work being handled for you.
Your point is a good one and I actually have 3 toons. 1 flies a Hulk and refines high-sec ore at 100%. Another flies an Orca and Hulk as well as drives an Itty V. Then there is this one I'm training up as a combat pilot.
My Corp does hi-sec mining ops as well as wh operations. Other times I mine with my three toons (2 hulks and a hauler). However, there are times when it is impractical for me to dual box or run two accounts so I'll mine solo. Not as efficient, but still produces some ISK. The new Mac may work well for that.
|
Lord Vyper
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 22:35:00 -
[430] - Quote
Inspiration wrote:Lord Vyper wrote:15% multiplies out in a fleet quite well. And will give you considerably more output in a fleet than a group of mack's in equal number. For corps that want to get the most mining done in the fastest time such as probed sites or valuable pockets this is the best option. 3 mining lasers allows you to pull from 3 roids instead of 2 which can be very useful. In your book is an opinion and only that. Everyone has their own strategies on how to min/max. If you have secure space be it high, low or nullsec the hulk will still be your best option for eating roids. 10 hulks vs 10 mack's 150% output difference at a minimum. If your worried about being attacked the other options begin to have more appeal, but if not the hulk is still best option number wise. The 15.5% more mining (theoretical number in a perfect world), you will never get, not even close to. And 10 Hulks vs 10 Mackinaws in this perfect numerical world is still just 15% more, not magically 150%! Explained I already did that the fleet factor is irrelevant (not to mention bogus), but when choosing the max yield per minute setups a fleet will hurt the hulk in a negative way as its small ore hold will block yield if not emptied rapidly and consistently. And be honest, when speaking of fleet mining we nearly always talk about some guy controlling 3 or more accounts, maybe with a buddy or two doing the same. Not at all, the one player per ship in a fleet of many, most people seem to fantasize about. Micromanagement will be a limiting factor here, especially in a fleet!
Math its your friend. 15% x 10 = 150%. Its a per ship difference meaning that every ship of that type that you add will increase the gap between the 2 fleets.This is a total yield calculation between 2 fleets. Even using your 6% number which is ridiculous number you pulled out of ur arse for the sake of trying to win an argument its still 60% more yield in a group of 10 vs 10. In smaller groups which is quite possible that gap is decreased significantly and does give more reasons to use a tankier ship with larger holds for the sake of convenience and laziness. I don't assume to know what CCP is thinking but the new redesigned hulk looks to reward the attentive human miner and punish the macro multiboxing AFKer. I am all for this. And as for fleet bonuses they are multiplicative not additive. So the gap does INCREASE as you gain more ships not decrease. You sir are a politician not a mathematician. I'm all for constructive discussion but the amount of arrogance you are displaying in your posts is unacceptable. Roleplaying kills people in Eve. |
|
Cyprus Amaro
Tortuga Coalition 102
10
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 22:42:00 -
[431] - Quote
El'essar Viocragh wrote:Jett0 wrote:Inspiration wrote:Otherwise, as things stand, there hardly ever will be a sane reason to use a Hulk, given the advantages the Mackinaw has over the Hulk. The way a miner friend of mine put it, the Hulk becomes worse for solo mining but better for fleet mining. No, group mining in general takes a nerf with 1.2. Currently a tank fitted hulk (em ward amp II, 2x SSE II, Inv II, DC II, PDS II, MATSR I, MCDFE I) has shield resists of 79 / 78 / 78 / 79 and ingame EHP of 23'003 without any gang modifiers. The same fit on Sisi currently achieves 24'119 EHP which looks like a small boost, especially since a lot of those EHP moved from hull and armor over to shields. But since exhumers lost their t2 base resists, this fit now has shield resists of 75 / 73 / 73 / 78, meaning remote rep from properly set up teamplay now has to counter the damage from an average resist of 74,75% instead of 78.5%. In other words, 25.25% incoming damage instead of 21.5%, a 17% increase of damage taken.
You have a much better understanding of this than I do. I appreciate your analysis above.
|
El'essar Viocragh
Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik Corium Fission
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 22:48:00 -
[432] - Quote
Lord Vyper wrote:Math its your friend. 15% x 10 = 150%. Its a per ship difference meaning that every ship of that type that you add will increase the gap between the 2 fleets. And yet, the percentual difference between the two fleets stays 15%.
The 150% is the absolute amount of additional ore mined by the hulk fleet over the mackinaw fleet relative to a single mackinaw's yield (i.e. the 10 hulks get 1.5 mackinaws for free).
PS: Math just unfriended you. |
Lord Vyper
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 22:57:00 -
[433] - Quote
El'essar Viocragh wrote:Lord Vyper wrote:Math its your friend. 15% x 10 = 150%. Its a per ship difference meaning that every ship of that type that you add will increase the gap between the 2 fleets. And yet, the percentual difference between the two fleets stays 15%. The 150% is the absolute amount of additional ore mined by the hulk fleet over the mackinaw fleet relative to a single mackinaw's yield (i.e. the 10 hulks get 1.5 mackinaws for free). PS: Math just unfriended you.
I was reffering to the amount of ore mined Thank you for proving my point. |
Octoven
Four Pillar Production Dragehund
3
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 23:03:00 -
[434] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:Jarin Arenos wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:Octoven wrote:Will be a nice little patch; however, could you have a talk with the graphics department? I do NOT see CCP's sudden die hard addiction to camo skins. Honestly, do you see any trees, shrubs, or bushes in space to blend in with?? IMHO they are ass ugly. Take the CNR for example. Granted, the raven looks like a cancerous deformed ship, but now with tech camo it looks like it is a sickly cancerous deformed ship with leprosy or something. Its nice CCP wants to make them stand out but damn.
At least go with some black hulls with variation in trim colors and crap like that. Just seems ******** to have a ship painted in camo in a space environment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage So what you're saying is that camo ships should have a smaller sig radius stat to represent the greater difficulty in automatic identification and targeting? I was just joking/bad posting.. I will try and remember not to do that again
Yeah, the only thing I received from that link is that WWI is where they were most widely used and less often than in WWII and the closer we got to modern age, the more it was phased out which may imply the military saw how useless or pointless they were?
|
Dio Chrysostom
8 Bit Redux
4
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 23:41:00 -
[435] - Quote
I have read some of the various general complaints in relation, or even not in relation to this particular thread and I want those who posted them to know that a majority of players that mater agree with you on things like the crappy new inventory systems and new paint colors. The reason there are not more of us complaining is because we have canceled our subs started to move over to new games that are actually hard to play and the reason your seeing all the negativity about your complaints is because a majority of players that browse, and troll, the forums are indy players here to see what the next planned reach around CCP is going to give them will be. While also getting to see the next way eve is going to become a safer easier place so they can finaly be the best ever no matter how easy it is. Just remember miners when everyone is the best, everyone is just mediocre. CCP I am only sad it took me 3 years to realize how pathetic you guys where, at least I didnt pay real money to play for the last 1.5 years of it. |
Lord Vyper
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 23:44:00 -
[436] - Quote
El'essar Viocragh wrote:Lord Vyper wrote:Math its your friend. 15% x 10 = 150%. Its a per ship difference meaning that every ship of that type that you add will increase the gap between the 2 fleets. And yet, the percentual difference between the two fleets stays 15%. The 150% is the absolute amount of additional ore mined by the hulk fleet over the mackinaw fleet relative to a single mackinaw's yield (i.e. the 10 hulks get 1.5 mackinaws for free). PS: Math just unfriended you. PPS: why are you talking about a 15% difference, when the Hulk has two 15% bonuses and the Mackinaw has one 1% bonus, making the difference 27.25% on sisi?
I was working off the numbers Inspiration was trying to use to justify him/her opinion that Hulks will be useless. The mack actually has another bonus on it plus 50% yield. You bring up a valid point I havent crunched out the raw bonuses for myself. I will do so now. |
El'essar Viocragh
Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik Corium Fission
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 23:50:00 -
[437] - Quote
Well, the 50% are just the 3 strip miners without the art departent having to make a new model.
And the mack bonus should read 5% of course, since I stated the hulk bonus as total and not per level aswell.
|
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
195
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 23:51:00 -
[438] - Quote
Math wrote:Screw you too, Jett0 I'm trying to calculate the ore benefits, but I keep coming up with zero. Maybe you guys can check my equation: (Hulk yield) * 3 + (Orca bay) - (Hauler time) + (Refining) + (# of friends) - (Multiboxing) + (Falcon)
I have no credibility on mining, but based on interesting arguments from both sides, I'd say these new stats will be a success. Much better than Skiff < Mack < Hulk. Occasionally plays sober |
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
269
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 23:55:00 -
[439] - Quote
Jett0 wrote:Jonuts wrote:Some good things, with asterisks! To clarify, I'll emphasize the word "recently." There was the initial rage, which died down a bit as they pushed the weekly update devblogs. Then they stopped, and a few wondered if they were "done" with Unified Inventory. My point is, if the devs don't have time for a full devblog, even a small one would be nice to let us know important features and fixes are being worked on. For example, you know what I'd like to see? A post/blog with "Yes, we're still looking at making low-sec/mercenaries/piracy awesome like you wanted, but other things have priority right now. No idea when we'll come back to it." Your points about the test server feedback are entirely valid, but that's a different issue. If the hand-wave attitude you mention is true, that tells me they need to make Singularity easier to access and get more players on it. You might counter that with "or they could just listen to the feedback in the first place," but I have a feeling they've had players complain about test features before that released just fine (no proof, mind you, just MMO communities in general). Lots of feedback from a few players at best proves that a few players are very passionate about that feature/change. Trying to take that feedback and turn it into a cross-section of the entire population is a practice that forms entire university majors. When they make mistakes like this, I just remind myself that Incarna gave us Crucible.
You're right, in that no matter what feature you add in, there will be people complaining. They could write code that would give players a blow job, and someone would complain "My girlfriend does it better". The difference here was, simply put, ALL feedback was negative. Had plenty of folks that said "Cool concept, execution needs work". Also had quite a few folks that said "Die in a fire", just in nicer terms since no one was pissed off yet. Unanimous negative feedback isn't a 'sign' that you're doing it wrong, it's proof positive that you're doing it wrong. Seriously, the best comments about the Unified Inventory basically boiled down to "it's not ready yet".
Lord Vyper wrote: Math its your friend. 15% x 10 = 150%. Its a per ship difference meaning that every ship of that type that you add will increase the gap between the 2 fleets.This is a total yield calculation between 2 fleets.
You seem to be missing the distinction between an actual number (Such as 15) and a percentage (15%). Lets pretend that ship A mines 100 per minute, and ship B has the 15% advantage, and mines 115 per minute. Fleet A has 10 Ship A's in it. Fleet B and 10 ship B's in it.
Fleet A mining: 100 x 10 = 1000 Fleet B Mining: 115 x 10 = 1150 Fleet B mines 150 more than Fleet A. That is, however, only a 15% increase. It doesn't matter how many ships there are. As long as Fleet A and Fleet B have the same number, the increase will only be 15%. The gap slowly gets bigger in REAL numbers, but percentage wise, remains constant. So yes, math is our friend, but perhaps you should apologize to math and buy it a slice of cake? It certainly isn't your friend. |
Lord Vyper
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 00:10:00 -
[440] - Quote
Your right was using my finger instead of my abacus when I was writing this my apologies to math. I was thinking about total ore mined over extended periods of time and explaining it with percentages. Its 90 degrees here today I brain farted. I concede my failure to argue my point correctly. Anyways my point was that Hulks will still have a huge advantage assuming your using a decent fleet size and running bonuses like cycle time from the Orca. The only time you will be losing out is if you are multiboxing and not paying attention to your ore hold, but this is no different than things are now. So I can't comprehend how that can be used as an excuse to dislike a ships bonuses.
Anyone know what is the total bonus difference between the ships assuming you fit the Mack with 3 mining 2 upgrades and the Hulk with 2? How are stacking penalties assessed? |
|
El'essar Viocragh
Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik Corium Fission
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 00:33:00 -
[441] - Quote
I found the 15% :) The Hulk has a 15% yield advantage in ice mining over the mack. The 27.25% i stated earlier is for ore.
As for the differences, for ore the 3 MLU Mack has +29.7%, 2 MLU Hulk has 55.43% for +25.73 percentage points, ignoring the +50% on the Mack since that only equals the 2 strip miners vs 3 strip miners.
For ice the hulk should be at 67.09% cycle time and the mack at 75.59% for -8.5 percentage points. |
Lord Vyper
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 01:12:00 -
[442] - Quote
Thanks for doing the math. |
Lair Osen
chromium cross
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 01:54:00 -
[443] - Quote
Are there actually new mining rigs which people have mentioned a few times? And what happened to that Mining Frigate??
BTW I like the new Uni Inv, it makes it a lot easier for me to move stuff around and sort through all the stuff i have lying around my hangars, though i admit it is a little bit more laggy.
|
Lord Vyper
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 01:59:00 -
[444] - Quote
Lair Osen wrote:Are there actually new mining rigs which people have mentioned a few times? And what happened to that Mining Frigate??
BTW I like the new Uni Inv, it makes it a lot easier for me to move stuff around and sort through all the stuff i have lying around my hangars, though i admit it is a little bit more laggy.
Theres new rigs 12% cycle reduction to ice harvesters and a mercoxite one for 16% increase in mining amount. both listed on sisi under electronic rigs - medium. Both the blueprint and the module are seeded.
|
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
196
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 02:41:00 -
[445] - Quote
Jonuts wrote:You're right, in that no matter what feature you add in, there will be people complaining. They could write code that would give players a blow job, and someone would complain "My girlfriend does it better". The difference here was, simply put, ALL feedback was negative. Had plenty of folks that said "Cool concept, execution needs work". Also had quite a few folks that said "Die in a fire", just in nicer terms since no one was pissed off yet. Unanimous negative feedback isn't a 'sign' that you're doing it wrong, it's proof positive that you're doing it wrong. Seriously, the best comments about the Unified Inventory basically boiled down to "it's not ready yet".
Good summary.
And because you made me laugh, here's for you:
CCP Interrogative New Survey for the Advancement of New Eden wrote:Please provide your feedback on this feature:
- I luv u 4ever CCP!
- Cool concept, execution needs work
- Die in a fire
- My girlfriend does it better
Occasionally plays sober |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
37
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 07:42:00 -
[446] - Quote
Lord Vyper wrote:Inspiration wrote:Lord Vyper wrote:15% multiplies out in a fleet quite well. And will give you considerably more output in a fleet than a group of mack's in equal number. For corps that want to get the most mining done in the fastest time such as probed sites or valuable pockets this is the best option. 3 mining lasers allows you to pull from 3 roids instead of 2 which can be very useful. In your book is an opinion and only that. Everyone has their own strategies on how to min/max. If you have secure space be it high, low or nullsec the hulk will still be your best option for eating roids. 10 hulks vs 10 mack's 150% output difference at a minimum. If your worried about being attacked the other options begin to have more appeal, but if not the hulk is still best option number wise. The 15.5% more mining (theoretical number in a perfect world), you will never get, not even close to. And 10 Hulks vs 10 Mackinaws in this perfect numerical world is still just 15% more, not magically 150%! Explained I already did that the fleet factor is irrelevant (not to mention bogus), but when choosing the max yield per minute setups a fleet will hurt the hulk in a negative way as its small ore hold will block yield if not emptied rapidly and consistently. And be honest, when speaking of fleet mining we nearly always talk about some guy controlling 3 or more accounts, maybe with a buddy or two doing the same. Not at all, the one player per ship in a fleet of many, most people seem to fantasize about. Micromanagement will be a limiting factor here, especially in a fleet! Math its your friend. 15% x 10 = 150%. Its a per ship difference meaning that every ship of that type that you add will increase the gap between the 2 fleets.This is a total yield calculation between 2 fleets. Even using your 6% number which is ridiculous number you pulled out of ur arse for the sake of trying to win an argument its still 60% more yield in a group of 10 vs 10. In smaller groups which is quite possible that gap is decreased significantly and does give more reasons to use a tankier ship with larger holds for the sake of convenience and laziness. I don't assume to know what CCP is thinking but the new redesigned hulk looks to reward the attentive human miner and punish the macro multiboxing AFKer. I am all for this. And as for fleet bonuses they are multiplicative not additive. So the gap does INCREASE as you gain more ships not decrease. You sir are a politician not a mathematician. I'm all for constructive discussion but the amount of arrogance you are displaying in your posts is unacceptable. Roleplaying kills people in Eve.
Do you think you will qualify for any job that requires people interaction and/or math skills?
You are blaming me to pull numbers out of my arse and not being able to understand percentages, yet claim that you yourself are for a constructive argument. One word about you on all these issues:
Delusional! |
Smilingmonk
Sah Ltd
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 15:35:00 -
[447] - Quote
The UI does suck horribly. the NEW UI makes for more work to use and can be confusing if you are in a hurry to loot something or wanting to shift windows and find something fast. I still use the same number of windows that I used before, I just have to click A LOT MORE to open them and arrange them consistently between my accounts. It was a solution to a problem that was imagined only in the minds of the few, the smug, the powerful when the real solution was simply tweaking the existing UI with some of the new features and fixing the POS inventory system which has needed attention forever!
Having said that, as a lot of other people have, are there ANY plans to update the design of some of the ships, ESPECIALLY THE BUTT UGLY RUPTURE, into a realistic space ship rather than just a lazy attempt at meshing different geometry together to come up with something that looks like a kid threw a plastic pirate ship and a squirt gun in a camp fire and watched them melt together?
On the bright side, some of the other ships look fantastic and many of the other features are spot on.
Unfortunately, one or two "awe *****" like those mentioned above wipe out thousands of "attaboys". |
Annie Freemont
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 17:02:00 -
[448] - Quote
Dio Chrysostom wrote:I have read some of the various general complaints in relation, or even not in relation to this particular thread and I want those who posted them to know that a majority of players that mater agree with you on things like the crappy new inventory systems and new paint colors. The reason there are not more of us complaining is because we have canceled our subs started to move over to new games that are actually hard to play and the reason your seeing all the negativity about your complaints is because a majority of players that browse, and troll, the forums are indy players here to see what the next planned reach around CCP is going to give them will be. While also getting to see the next way eve is going to become a safer easier place so they can finaly be the best ever no matter how easy it is. Just remember miners when everyone is the best, everyone is just mediocre. CCP I am only sad it took me 3 years to realize how pathetic you guys where, at least I didnt pay real money to play for the last 1.5 years of it.
Umad Bro? |
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
274
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 23:01:00 -
[449] - Quote
Lord Vyper wrote:Your right was using my finger instead of my abacus when I was writing this my apologies to math.
WTF? Someone manned the **** up and admitted their mistake on the internet? The end is nigh! The Horsemen ride again! Run for your lives!!!!
Oh, and gotta give you props for manning up instead of pretending you're right :)
Jett0 wrote:And because you made me laugh, here's for you: CCP Interrogative New Survey for the Advancement of New Eden wrote:Please provide your feedback on this feature:
- I luv u 4ever CCP!
- Cool concept, execution needs work
- Die in a fire
- My girlfriend does it better
I <3 you. No homo. |
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
213
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 00:09:00 -
[450] - Quote
Jonuts wrote:I <3 you. No homo.
You didn't say "mate," so you're good.
Edit:
Jonuts wrote:Lord Vyper wrote:Your right was using my finger instead of my abacus when I was writing this my apologies to math. WTF? Someone manned the **** up and admitted their mistake on the internet? The end is nigh! The Horsemen ride again! Run for your lives!!!! Oh, and gotta give you props for manning up instead of pretending you're right :)
Logic and maturity in MY General Discussion? Get out.
On topic, is it just me or do the hanger and CQ switch faster on the test server? Occasionally plays sober |
|
Ryno Caval
Go Deeper Mining
11
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 00:34:00 -
[451] - Quote
I think the fitting tool should also have a value on it so you know how much ISK you have put into your ship and so when you save your fits you know approx. how much isk you are looking to spend |
Tarkett Reedster
House of Reed Interstellar Defense Force NISYN Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 01:15:00 -
[452] - Quote
Please read this post and don't ruin a part of the game I enjoy. The Hulk has two issues 1.) The ore hold is to small. When ice harvesters cycle, there is not enough room in the hold one strip miner will shut off. This means that every cycle you will have to restart one and move your ice out. That alone would make the ship useless next to the new Makinaw. You need to at least double the size. When I'm mining roids I get one cycle. That's insane, and yes I fly with a Orca so every cycle I need to move the ore out? 2.) The bonuses compared to the Makinaw brings into question why would I bother using this ship for an 20% difference in yield? I would trade the convenience of afk Mining with a Makinaw any day of the week. The Ore hold needs to be at least 12K m3. Even with the mining bonuses retained, compared to the other exhumers the new Hulk is questionable at best. Please don't ruin my hulk. The Makinaw Love the concept but you should extend the middle section of the ship to reflect the extremely large ore hold. Now I know the art guys love to do more then what is required and will want to redesign the whole ship but don't let them, because it will take them a year to get around to a full redesign. :-) Skiff I get the concept, but the logistics of low sec ninja mining are simply not very profitable. The transit times between the belt and station reduce the ISK per hour to the point that I can't see why I would even bother. Not to mention the risk in getting the ore back to high sec for sale. So unless you planning on anding a complimentary ore hauler with cloaking or other equivalent defensive attributes to the ship inventory your not providing a real use for this ship. Well one out off three ain't bad. I'll finish with one final thought. Mining just became viable again, after several years of 2 isk veld pricing, don't screw it up. CCP has a very long track record of taking far to long to rebalance something after its been introduced. Drone region ring a bell?
|
Lair Osen
chromium cross
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 01:59:00 -
[453] - Quote
Tarkett Reedster wrote:Please read this post and don't ruin a part of the game I enjoy. The Hulk has two issues 1.) The ore hold is to small. When ice harvesters cycle, there is not enough room in the hold one strip miner will shut off. This means that every cycle you will have to restart one and move your ice out. That alone would make the ship useless next to the new Makinaw. You need to at least double the size. When I'm mining roids I get one cycle. That's insane, and yes I fly with a Orca so every cycle I need to move the ore out? 2.) The bonuses compared to the Makinaw brings into question why would I bother using this ship for an 20% difference in yield? I would trade the convenience of afk Mining with a Makinaw any day of the week. The Ore hold needs to be at least 12K m3. Even with the mining bonuses retained, compared to the other exhumers the new Hulk is questionable at best. Please don't ruin my hulk. The Makinaw Love the concept but you should extend the middle section of the ship to reflect the extremely large ore hold. Now I know the art guys love to do more then what is required and will want to redesign the whole ship but don't let them, because it will take them a year to get around to a full redesign. :-) Skiff I get the concept, but the logistics of low sec ninja mining are simply not very profitable. The transit times between the belt and station reduce the ISK per hour to the point that I can't see why I would even bother. Not to mention the risk in getting the ore back to high sec for sale. So unless you planning on anding a complimentary ore hauler with cloaking or other equivalent defensive attributes to the ship inventory your not providing a real use for this ship. Well one out off three ain't bad. I'll finish with one final thought. Mining just became viable again, after several years of 2 isk veld pricing, don't screw it up. CCP has a very long track record of taking far to long to rebalance something after its been introduced. Drone region ring a bell?
1) im not an expert on ice mining but i thought the hulk mined 3x1000m3 ice per cycle, this means there would be 2 cycles till you have to transfer. Its not hard to stagger your strip miners so they dont all input ore at the same time, you should try useing a max yeild mining BS where you have to transfer ore 2 or 3 times a minute
2) As said in the dev blog, the mack is meant for solo mining where cargo space matters, while the hulk is meant for fleet mining where cargo shouldnt be an issue but yield is.
Skiff you can use the procurer for dangerous mining cos its really cheap with a decent cargo and yeild also "complimentary ore hauler with cloaking", its called a t2 transport ship |
Lord Vyper
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 02:27:00 -
[454] - Quote
Inspiration wrote:
You are blaming me to pull numbers out of my arse and not being able to understand percentages, yet claim that you yourself are for a constructive argument. One word about you on all these issues:
Delusional!
1. To say that your a prick would be putting things lightly. 2. I openly admitted I was using percents incorrectly to explain my point. I was thinking about the actual amount of ore being mined (m3) 3. I have had more than one job using math and until this embarrassing moment I have never had an issue. Not that its any of your damned business but I Have completed Calculus 4 and completed the first year of Aerospace Engineering. 6 years as a US Navy Firecontrolman (Tomahawk Missile operator). So while you may question my skills they have been proven accurate under fire in real life. 4. You have to lighten the phaq up - your not the only person on this forum that has an opinion and the extreme close minded ignorance you display towards everyone else's view speaks highly of your character. 5. It is more than okay to give your input as to how you wish changes to this game to be implemented however don't forget you are talking to grown men and women who work very hard to bring you a product, so maintain a level of respect without stomping like a child about how if this doesnt get fixed you will quit eve (BYE!. 6. CCP has all end decisions on what direction they want to push this universe to generate their idea of fun and balance. 7. Don't post anymore crap that only has the purpose of 1 up-ing someone. That in no way has a positive outcome for any party. Its a discussion not a ROOSTER slapping contest. There is no reward for getting your epeen to level 100. except a single life with no girl surrounded by cats dressed like mechwarriors. 8. CARRY ON o7
|
Jett0
Surface Warfare Tribal Band
215
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 04:14:00 -
[455] - Quote
Tarkett Reedster wrote:I get the concept, but the logistics of low sec ninja mining are simply not very profitable. ... So unless you planning on anding a complimentary ore hauler with cloaking... This might be a dumb question on my part but: Can you not do this already?
Lair Osen wrote:Also AFK miners like you are the reason people stated ganking in the 1st place I thought it was for trolling. AFK miners can't give " tasty tears." What's wrong with AFK mining anyway? On the risk / reward scale, it's a perfectly balanced way to play. You're trading safety for multi-tasking ability. (Or less boredom)
Lord Vyper wrote:I Have completed Calculus 4 Yeah, but you need Calc 5 before you can start Ridiculously Complicated Mathematics Specialization. No wonder you suck. +1 for "cats dressed like mechwarriors." Occasionally plays sober |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
584
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 06:03:00 -
[456] - Quote
Lord Vyper wrote:Inspiration wrote:
You are blaming me to pull numbers out of my arse and not being able to understand percentages, yet claim that you yourself are for a constructive argument. One word about you on all these issues:
Delusional!
1. To say that your a prick would be putting things lightly. 2. I openly admitted I was using percents incorrectly to explain my point. I was thinking about the actual amount of ore being mined (m3) 3. I have had more than one job using math and until this embarrassing moment I have never had an issue. Not that its any of your damned business but I Have completed Calculus 4 and completed the first year of Aerospace Engineering. 6 years as a US Navy Firecontrolman (Tomahawk Missile operator). So while you may question my skills they have been proven accurate under fire in real life. 4. You have to lighten the phaq up - your not the only person on this forum that has an opinion and the extreme close minded ignorance you display towards everyone else's view speaks highly of your character. 5. It is more than okay to give your input as to how you wish changes to this game to be implemented however don't forget you are talking to grown men and women who work very hard to bring you a product, so maintain a level of respect without stomping like a child about how if this doesnt get fixed you will quit eve (BYE!. 6. CCP has all end decisions on what direction they want to push this universe to generate their idea of fun and balance. 7. Don't post anymore crap that only has the purpose of 1 up-ing someone. That in no way has a positive outcome for any party. Its a discussion not a ROOSTER slapping contest. There is no reward for getting your epeen to level 100. except a single life with no girl surrounded by cats dressed like mechwarriors. 8. CARRY ON o7
I need you to Tomahawk me into a life where I am a person surrouned by cats dressed like mechwarrios. And I can only talk to them with the voice of Vader.
p.s. did you roll caldari in EVE?
I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Lord Vyper
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
12
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 06:32:00 -
[457] - Quote
rodyas wrote:
I need you to Tomahawk me into a life where I am a person surrouned by cats dressed like mechwarrios. And I can only talk to them with the voice of Vader.
p.s. did you roll caldari in EVE?
Main is Caldari. 2nd is Gallente and 3rd is Mini.
And whoever said Calc 5 is what you need to etc... you are correct which is why I left college to blow stuff up. |
Beidorion eldwardan
Corporation Danmark Tactical Narcotics Team
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 09:12:00 -
[458] - Quote
from i have seen on the test server. im very unhappy with having as many hulks as i have i'll never be abl to sell them now that they become useless to me
1) i now hav to fly all over the place to chance crystals in my cargohold ( yes im talking about the TINY space you've given us to work with ) a full set of t2 crystals for all the ore type would have needed a little less than 2500 m3 now i have to go with only 4 types of ore so the little yield bonus i have will go completely lost on the time lost changing the crystals from cargohold.
2) orehold is simply too small give us 12-15000 m3 and a cargohold of 2500m3 WE NEED A DECENT GARGOHOLD
if you keep the new lesser hulk then you kick all your multi account PAYING COSTOMERS in the *******. im not going to make a " i'll stop playing eve post" BUT... i have 4 of my 8 accounts that will become useless to me so i'll have to switch to ratting and then cancel my four mining only toons '
(not) way to go ccp - yet another example of ccp make high sec better and butting it up for the nul sec guys.
ruined hulk + **** up with chance to moon mining = why even bother with being in big nasty expensive nulsec
if you ( CCP devblog dude ) do not wish to read all o my rant about how your messing up then here is the short pointer
- bigger cargohold 2500m3 and bigger orehold 10000-15000 - <- thats my contructive point |
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 10:31:00 -
[459] - Quote
mkint wrote:Jett0 wrote:mkint wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:"Require SHIFT be pressed to open a new window (applies to Show Info and Inventory folders)" you're doing it again. You're breaking existing functionality for no good reason. Isn't this just extending what that option applies to? What does it break? Having 1 checkbox for 2 things that are completely unrelated? How is that extending anything? This is another example of why this particular dev shouldn't be allowed to touch UI stuff. He has no concept of usability and workflow. Has he even ever played EVE? You know, just to see what all the hubbub is about? Do you use your show-info windows the same way you use inventory windows? Do you use your inventory windows the same way you use show-info windows? Why in the ever loving hell should they be forced to behave the same way, when they don't have a goddamned thing to do with one another? 1 checkbox? Are you freakin' kidding me?
The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal. The only way to find the right solution is discussing all possibilities first. The idea about adding the 'Shift' option to the already existing 'Show Info' setting was just an idea that had been floating around since people want to try to stay away from constantly adding new settings in the 'Esc Menu'. Your input matters and helps us find the right solution. CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
Lair Osen
chromium cross
3
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 10:35:00 -
[460] - Quote
Beidorion eldwardan wrote:from i have seen on the test server. im very unhappy with having as many hulks as i have i'll never be abl to sell them now that they become useless to me
1) i now hav to fly all over the place to chance crystals in my cargohold ( yes im talking about the TINY space you've given us to work with ) a full set of t2 crystals for all the ore type would have needed a little less than 2500 m3 now i have to go with only 4 types of ore so the little yield bonus i have will go completely lost on the time lost changing the crystals from cargohold.
2) orehold is simply too small give us 12-15000 m3 and a cargohold of 2500m3 WE NEED A DECENT GARGOHOLD
if you keep the new lesser hulk then you kick all your multi account PAYING COSTOMERS in the *******. im not going to make a " i'll stop playing eve post" BUT... i have 4 of my 8 accounts that will become useless to me so i'll have to switch to ratting and then cancel my four mining only toons '
(not) way to go ccp - yet another example of ccp make high sec better and butting it up for the nul sec guys.
ruined hulk + **** up with chance to moon mining = why even bother with being in big nasty expensive nulsec
if you ( CCP devblog dude ) do not wish to read all o my rant about how your messing up then here is the short pointer
- bigger cargohold 2500m3 and bigger orehold 10000-15000 - <- thats my contructive point
If youre solo mining in the hulks then you shouldnt need more than 3 types of crystals at the most to fill your hulks ore bay, If youre jet can mining you can put the crystals in the can which has heaps of space If your mining with an industrial or an orca then you you also have lots of space to carry crystals in and hulks are supposed to be used for fleet like that now anyway
also if you want to solo mine i suggest you only carry 2 crystals of each type and simple mine different types at the same time |
|
Olga Ivanovna
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 11:41:00 -
[461] - Quote
Did some missioning today, and I thought I should be specific about the problems I have with the Uni. Inv. from just one hour of gameplaying/carebearing. This is ship cargohold specific, not at all about POS.
SORRY if being redundant, someone may have posted this before but there are so many threads concerning this now.
1. Screen estate - the windows are way to big with status fields and black spaces. Please make the extra info optional, and please get rid of unused pixels.
2. I always run around with my trunk opened to see the ships inventory. There are a few issues with this: - The window does not notice when I change ships. I still make a lot of mistakes due to this (looking in the wrong inventory) - The cargo hold window should not be specific for the different ships. There should be a general "cargo hold window" that is used for all the ships, that always show up in the same position and always reflect the current ship. If I run a new ship and click on cargo, it should pop up the same way and in the same place as left it last time (even if it was in another ship). If I want to see cargo of other ships than my current, THEN I could open the uni. inv. - In space when looting, the uni.inv. window opens on every can, and when clicking "loot all". it goes back to my cargo. Why? It should close, I already have my cargo hold opened, remember? - If I forget to open the trunk when undocking, there should be a simple way to open the cargo hold in space. I don't want to go through the uni.inv. with ALT-C or button. I want that handy window I already have positioned.
All in all, my suggestion is that cargo hold should be a specific function. It should focus on doing just this - showing the ships cargo hold, and by that you can optimize it to work in a smoth way. You should be able to use the new Uni.Inv. code, and nothing stops the uni.inv. from complementing the cargo hold.
I think the mistake is that uni.inv. is seen as the core function, when it should be a handy tool to ease up things. It's not suitable for replacing EVERYTHING, just some things. |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
559
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 11:45:00 -
[462] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
Steijn
Quay Industries
174
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 11:58:00 -
[463] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:mkint wrote:Jett0 wrote:mkint wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:"Require SHIFT be pressed to open a new window (applies to Show Info and Inventory folders)" you're doing it again. You're breaking existing functionality for no good reason. Isn't this just extending what that option applies to? What does it break? Having 1 checkbox for 2 things that are completely unrelated? How is that extending anything? This is another example of why this particular dev shouldn't be allowed to touch UI stuff. He has no concept of usability and workflow. Has he even ever played EVE? You know, just to see what all the hubbub is about? Do you use your show-info windows the same way you use inventory windows? Do you use your inventory windows the same way you use show-info windows? Why in the ever loving hell should they be forced to behave the same way, when they don't have a goddamned thing to do with one another? 1 checkbox? Are you freakin' kidding me? The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal. The only way to find the right solution is discussing all possibilities first. The idea about adding the 'Shift' option to the already existing 'Show Info' setting was just an idea that had been floating around since people want to try to stay away from constantly adding new settings in the 'Esc Menu'. Your input matters and helps us find the right solution.
with the greatest respect, the 'right' solution was to have tinkered with the old way of doing things and not completely FUBAR the way of doing things with the new Uni.Inv. |
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
450
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 13:08:00 -
[464] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:mkint wrote:Jett0 wrote:mkint wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:"Require SHIFT be pressed to open a new window (applies to Show Info and Inventory folders)" you're doing it again. You're breaking existing functionality for no good reason. Isn't this just extending what that option applies to? What does it break? Having 1 checkbox for 2 things that are completely unrelated? How is that extending anything? This is another example of why this particular dev shouldn't be allowed to touch UI stuff. He has no concept of usability and workflow. Has he even ever played EVE? You know, just to see what all the hubbub is about? Do you use your show-info windows the same way you use inventory windows? Do you use your inventory windows the same way you use show-info windows? Why in the ever loving hell should they be forced to behave the same way, when they don't have a goddamned thing to do with one another? 1 checkbox? Are you freakin' kidding me? The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal. The only way to find the right solution is discussing all possibilities first. The idea about adding the 'Shift' option to the already existing 'Show Info' setting was just an idea that had been floating around since people want to try to stay away from constantly adding new settings in the 'Esc Menu'. Your input matters and helps us find the right solution.
The solution to most of the issues people are feeling is REALLY REALLY simple.
You do not have to complicate matters by making persistent SHIFT-click options in various places, or any other fancy ideas you have come up with recently.
All you have to do is these few SIMPLE things:
1. Bring back the remaining right click shortcuts, ORE Bay etc. Make ALL shortcuts open in a new window by default and remember size and position. 2. Bring back buttons for opening Ships, Items and Corp hangers. Make them open in a new window by default and remember size and position. 3. When in space, make the Cargo button open the cargo hold. NOT the inventory. Cargo button >>> Cargo hold. ItGÇÖs not rocket science. Make it open in a new window by default and remember size and position.
I honestly cannot understand why you have not re-introduced this functionality already. It really cannot be that complicated. Seriously.
|
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
1100
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 13:54:00 -
[465] - Quote
1. The cargo size on the mining barges / exhumers should bear more relation to the # of strip miners that they can fit (and thus the number of spare crystals you need to carry).
A ballpark figure, even with the new, smaller T2 crystal sizes is still 500 m3 x # of strip miner slots. Which gives enough room that you can carry (1) used and (1) new crystal for five different ore types and still have room to swap a crystal out.
Alternately, cut the crystal sizes on T1 to 12 m3 and make the T2 crystals 15 or 18 m3 each, then use 400 m3 x # of strip miner slots.
2. The Rorqual and Orca ore bays need to be boosted in size by 1.5x to 2.5x to match the increase of the new ore bays on the barges/exhumers. Or those bays need to be affected by cargo rigs and cargo expander modules.
Orca - 50k m3 should be boosted to 150k-200k m3 Rorqual - 250k m3 bay should be boosted into the 400-500k m3 range |
Krystyn
Serenity Rising LLC Vanguard.
99
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 15:05:00 -
[466] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:
The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal. The only way to find the right solution is discussing all possibilities first. The idea about adding the 'Shift' option to the already existing 'Show Info' setting was just an idea that had been floating around since people want to try to stay away from constantly adding new settings in the 'Esc Menu'. Your input matters and helps us find the right solution.
Seriously give it up with the 'Shift' already. Anything that you could possibly use shift for you can use a right click for.
Get back to the right click. You should be able to do pretty much everything via a right click menu. You can leave Shift+a hotkey for stuff, but please please please please make right click useful again.
Who in their right mind thought getting rid of the right click options was a good idea?
Why did a one handed quick and easy operations for most inventory tasks become two hands required and laggy. In what world is that an improvement.
I've given up anything remotely industrial related because of the excessive shift clicks and lag doing such things. When I pvp I don't bother to loot most of the time since it takes too long to open the damn cans. I shoot wrecks most of the time, now. Why have you broken my game?
Anything that any of you DEVs have every thought about UI design has moved the game backwards. My whole corp left back to EQ because of these steps backwards in functionality and useability.
85 Druid on the Drinal-Maelin Starpyre server in Everquest Anyone care to join me? |
Krystyn
Serenity Rising LLC Vanguard.
99
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 15:13:00 -
[467] - Quote
Rommiee wrote:
The solution to most of the issues people are feeling is REALLY REALLY simple.
You do not have to complicate matters by making persistent SHIFT-click options in various places, or any other fancy ideas you have come up with recently.
All you have to do is these few SIMPLE things:
1. Bring back the remaining right click shortcuts, ORE Bay etc. Make ALL shortcuts open in a new window by default and remember size and position. 2. Bring back buttons for opening Ships, Items and Corp hangers. Make them open in a new window by default and remember size and position. 3. When in space, make the Cargo button open the cargo hold. NOT the inventory. Cargo button >>> Cargo hold. ItGÇÖs not rocket science. Make it open in a new window by default and remember size and position.
I honestly cannot understand why you have not re-introduced this functionality already. It really cannot be that complicated. Seriously.
Wow that looks just like the old inventory system...please make the tree go the way of the door to the captains room and bring back real usability like this.
Does anyone have anything but ship spinning in the station anymore?
|
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
106
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 15:57:00 -
[468] - Quote
Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012.
So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:
- Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.
Is this accurate for how the setting would function?
This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree.
With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable? CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
365
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 16:02:00 -
[469] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012. So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:
- Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.
Is this accurate for how the setting would function? This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree. With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable? Sounds about right |
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
106
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 16:07:00 -
[470] - Quote
Salpun wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012. So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:
- Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.
Is this accurate for how the setting would function? This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree. With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable? Sounds about right
We are also adding the ability to drag tabs out of the index tree to open them as new secondary windows, that will always work, with or without this setting turned on. CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
365
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 16:10:00 -
[471] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Salpun wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012. So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:
- Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.
Is this accurate for how the setting would function? This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree. With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable? Sounds about right We are also adding the ability to drag tabs out of the index tree to open them as new secondary windows, that will always work, with or without this setting turned on.
Add the orca Corp hanger back to the right click and I think you have a winner. Are these changes live on Sisi? |
Kirin Intarca
Armored Core Inc. Industrial Technonauts
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 17:15:00 -
[472] - Quote
I have been a part of many test servers. I have been testing games since Star Wars Galaxies. I am also a student, working through a Game Art & Design degree.
The flaming these forums give to the Devs sickens me. The work that goes into even a small patch like locking pinned windows. Is many man hours of programmers behind a desk operating on coffee, spending a lot of time away from their families. Just to make us, the players, a little more happy about our game. The Devs do not ignore the player feedback. Every Dev listens as they are artists, they are designers. feedback is the backbone of game development. They may take longer than you, the player, may like in fixing a known issue; but take a moment and consider what it takes to make a game. for example:
Assassin's Creed Revelations was in concept and being in the first stages of design two years before Assassin's Creed 1 was released. alpha testing of a game, starts a year or two before closed betas on some games. An "easy" patch to a live MMO server, can take weeks to create and insure will work so that the devs don't have to patch thier patch, and even then it is not an exact science.
Game Design and Development is an art form. It takes time from feedback to implementation. I don't care how long you have waited for the unified inventory to be fixed, or if Minmatar capital ships will be reshaded, or whatever. The Devs know about it, they are working on it. Give them a break and let them work. Use constructive feedback to give them good criticism.
The unified inventory is a great addition, it took some getting used to, and it could still use some refining. Most notably on lag/refresh rates. However, I absolutely love how it works. I can switch cargo contents from 6 different ships very quickly because I only have to open one inventory window, instead of the drone bay and cargo bay, and items inventory and ship hanger to gather the fit I just bought in Jita, and had sitting in the station.
The new mining ship changes both to frigates and barge/exhumers. To CPP and every Concept Designer, Player feedback, and programmer..... Thank you, this is a genius move and will really change the way mining is done. I can't wait to get final numbers.
Last note, Don't whine, gripe, and sob about a problem when talking to the devs. For those who may not know 'Dev' is short for Developer... If you have a problem, offer a real solution. If you can't, then simply mention the issue and let it drop, so the Devs can get to work on it. They develop, |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
806
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 17:44:00 -
[473] - Quote
Salpun wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:Salpun wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012. So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:
- Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.
Is this accurate for how the setting would function? This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree. With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable? Sounds about right We are also adding the ability to drag tabs out of the index tree to open them as new secondary windows, that will always work, with or without this setting turned on. Add the orca Corp hanger back to the right click and I think you have a winner. Are these changes live on Sisi? Some of these changes are live on SiSi, others are still only on CCP Punkturis' computer (CCP Optimal is on paternity leave so Punkturis is stepping to make those changes). Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Software Director | EVE Online, CCP Games | Follow on: Twitter / Google+ |
|
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
170
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 18:44:00 -
[474] - Quote
basically give us ways to make the new UI behave like the old ui as closely as possible.
shortcuts to inventory locations, customizable settings? or static locations, make them available. right click menu locations for ship hangers etc.
and why do you want fewer options in the esc menu? thats the place for the most options if there ever was one. thats where the maximum of customization options should occur.
ie, Which windows get tree menus expanded and which do not as standard, same for filters show/hide isk evaluation opening window type behaviors, (close empty wreck/loot can window, station can lock/unlock standard behavior)
also options should be lockable, ie, I dont want to be able to change which items appear on this overview tab while in space, but i want to be able to change this one. (feature request i know, but its an example of an option suitable for the esc menu)
Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Ships to goo calc - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=107898 |
Rock Kicker
Full Bore Inc Sobriety Test Failures
47
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 18:59:00 -
[475] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Salpun wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012. So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:
- Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.
Is this accurate for how the setting would function? This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree. With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable? Sounds about right We are also adding the ability to drag tabs out of the index tree to open them as new secondary windows, that will always work, with or without this setting turned on.
Any chance we can get an option to have the hangar divisions as tabs across the top of an inventory window like we used to? Having to expand out the tree /select division/shrink the tree each time I wish to change divisions requires at minimum 2 addition mouse clicks and takes more time. Old way was simpler, and much more efficient. FYI - I keep all trees minimized as I do not use them, and to make more screen space available for multiple windows. Personally, I would prefer to never have to use the cumbersome trees.
I know we can open a window for each division, and then stack the windows to create a tabbed environment, but to have to do this each time we access an array (especially at a POS) eats a lot of time.
Thanks! |
Steijn
Quay Industries
176
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 19:32:00 -
[476] - Quote
Kirin Intarca wrote:I Last note, Don't whine, gripe, and sob about a problem when talking to the devs. For those who may not know 'Dev' is short for Developer... If you have a problem, offer a real solution. If you can't, then simply mention the issue and let it drop, so the Devs can get to work on it. They develop,
I think your missing the point about these problems and some solutions been mentioned to the Devs BEFORE this was released on TQ. IMO the Devs are well entitled to receive the criticism that they are for simply releasing a system that was not ready for release, a point that the Devs even admit to after if was put live. |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1051
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 19:44:00 -
[477] - Quote
YES!
thank you CCP, and boo to all the haters, fling trash around on these forums. You guys are great, and you've never done anything in the past month to make me tink you haven't been listening. Seriously, I've never seen you do this before and I've been here for 7 years. In the past you would wait at least a year before fixing some broken feature you released without fully testing it. But now? your taking the feedback and actually addressing it within a reasonable time frame. It enforces those of us who give real feedback politely to keep doing so.
If you want to know wy you have so many hateful angry posters being jerks and flaming you, look no further than the mirror. This is what happens when well written non hateful posts get ignored for years *FW, blaster balance took a year, http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
41
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 20:10:00 -
[478] - Quote
Lord Vyper wrote:1. To say that your a prick would be putting things lightly.
You are entitled to that opinion!
But I do take offense to people accusing and attacking me for no reason, other then to have endless arguments. I always put a lot of thinking and effort into my post and when asked write the underlying weighted reasoning too. Read back and you will see the direct hostile reactions to my initial post. Whenever I and someone have different insights but they react polite, so do I.
Draw your conclusions from this!
Lord Vyper wrote:2. I openly admitted I was using percents incorrectly to explain my point. I was thinking about the actual amount of ore being mined (m3).
That take some extra post, did it not and even by then you already attacked me multiple times.
Lord Vyper wrote:3. I have had more than one job using math and until this embarrassing moment I have never had an issue. Not that its any of your damned business but I Have completed Calculus 4 and completed the first year of Aerospace Engineering. 6 years as a US Navy Firecontrolman (Tomahawk Missile operator). So while you may question my skills they have been proven accurate under fire in real life.
Math is a tool and without insight and being able to balance different aspects against each other, it is not even a useful tool. Plenty of really smart people with tons of knowledge do very stupid/dumb things. You made an error, then compounded it, and in your ultimate wisdom saw it prudent to attack me several times.
As for your job not being any of my business, correct. But now you mentioned it, I can hardly be impressed from that kind of work or see it as making your point. Being drilled to obey every command and stick with that for six years in a career that is really about destruction says something about your character alright, but not in a good way. To me it also explains why you have such a hard time understanding my arguments and just call everything i write bullshit.
Lord Vyper wrote:4. You have to lighten the phaq up - your not the only person on this forum that has an opinion and the extreme close minded ignorance you display towards everyone else's view speaks highly of your character.
If you are going to count, you will see the facts are quite different. I addressed the issue from many more angles and took more in consideration then just about anyone since i participated. On top of this I offered ways to make the Hulk a better ship for its role. But people like you just suck op everything CCP offered without thinking yourself and feel you need to attack the messengers time and time again. Now I know what you do, it makes perfect sense as to why you behave this way.
Lord Vyper wrote:5. It is more than okay to give your input as to how you wish changes to this game to be implemented however don't forget you are talking to grown men and women who work very hard to bring you a product, so maintain a level of respect without stomping like a child about how if this doesnt get fixed you will quit eve (BYE!.
I never ever wrote here that I was going to quit if CCP did not follow my input, you are making this up to score points with people that haven't followed the discussion and just read your post! You can call me an aggressive debater that responds personal to personal attacks, but that is about it. |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
41
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 20:12:00 -
[479] - Quote
Lord Vyper wrote:6. CCP has all end decisions on what direction they want to push this universe to generate their idea of fun and balance.
Not the smart thing to do, ignoring customer feedback on a massive scale. And certainly no reason for you to attack anyone why has issues with directions taken! Stop acting like a drone and allow others to voice their opinion too!
Lord Vyper wrote:7. Don't post anymore crap that only has the purpose of 1 up-ing someone. That in no way has a positive outcome for any party. Its a discussion not a ROOSTER slapping contest. There is no reward for getting your epeen to level 100. except a single life with no girl surrounded by cats dressed like mechwarriors. 8. CARRY ON o7
That is very good advice to yourself, I do not feel in the slightest addressed by it. |
Yezenia
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 21:14:00 -
[480] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:CCP Explorer wrote:Rattus Norwegius wrote:Someone in CCP should tell us whether we can expect any improvements to the Uni.Inv. soon though, and what they are working towards. Paging CCP Soundwave? We'll draw his attention to this thread. Hello! I am in China right now (it's pretty much the same as Iceland, except everything is upside down) so I can't grab the complete list. We're looking to do a few bugfixes/changes for August (among them, dragging and dropping to create individual windows) and then give you a bigger bunch of changes come winter. Anyway, I'll be back in Iceland sometime late next week.
Would it be too much to ask to at least have the lost functionality returned by the 6 month mark or should we not expect that before next spring? I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that it fixing the new inventory system is faster than restoring the old one. |
|
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 21:15:00 -
[481] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012. So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:
- Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.
Is this accurate for how the setting would function? This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree. With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable?
This sound very good. Please make it happen.
|
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 21:17:00 -
[482] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Salpun wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012. So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:
- Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.
Is this accurate for how the setting would function? This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree. With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable? Sounds about right We are also adding the ability to drag tabs out of the index tree to open them as new secondary windows, that will always work, with or without this setting turned on.
Great... but lets relist a requist, pleace make it possible to PIN these outtakes at will, and safe it for each station. Then I dont have to reopen the outtakes each time in (i.e.) jita, like I have to now... |
Olga Ivanovna
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 21:51:00 -
[483] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012. So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:
- Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.
Is this accurate for how the setting would function? This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree. With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable?
Yes! But also: Double-click on container (not only wreck) in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 22:06:00 -
[484] - Quote
Kirin Intarca wrote:I have been a part of many test servers. I have been testing games since Star Wars Galaxies. I am also a student, working through a Game Art & Design degree.
The flaming these forums give to the Devs sickens me. The work that goes into even a small patch like locking pinned windows. Is many man hours of programmers behind a desk operating on coffee, spending a lot of time away from their families. Just to make us, the players, a little more happy about our game. The Devs do not ignore the player feedback. Every Dev listens as they are artists, they are designers. feedback is the backbone of game development. They may take longer than you, the player, may like in fixing a known issue; but take a moment and consider what it takes to make a game. for example:
Assassin's Creed Revelations was in concept and being in the first stages of design two years before Assassin's Creed 1 was released. alpha testing of a game, starts a year or two before closed betas on some games. An "easy" patch to a live MMO server, can take weeks to create and insure will work so that the devs don't have to patch thier patch, and even then it is not an exact science.
Game Design and Development is an art form. It takes time from feedback to implementation. I don't care how long you have waited for the unified inventory to be fixed, or if Minmatar capital ships will be reshaded, or whatever. The Devs know about it, they are working on it. Give them a break and let them work. Use constructive feedback to give them good criticism.
The unified inventory is a great addition, it took some getting used to, and it could still use some refining. Most notably on lag/refresh rates. However, I absolutely love how it works. I can switch cargo contents from 6 different ships very quickly because I only have to open one inventory window, instead of the drone bay and cargo bay, and items inventory and ship hanger to gather the fit I just bought in Jita, and had sitting in the station.
The new mining ship changes both to frigates and barge/exhumers. To CPP and every Concept Designer, Player feedback, and programmer..... Thank you, this is a genius move and will really change the way mining is done. I can't wait to get final numbers.
Last note, Don't whine, gripe, and sob about a problem when talking to the devs. For those who may not know 'Dev' is short for Developer... If you have a problem, offer a real solution. If you can't, then simply mention the issue and let it drop, so the Devs can get to work on it. They develop,
Been a huge number of suggestions - most of them wanting UdL scrapped. Months of effort could have been saved if they had received advanced feedback from random people trying out the alpha, CSM actually doing their job, or the Dev's listening to Sisi feedback instead of blowing us off.
You didn't add a single thing to proper effort of getting them to wake up.
|
Geksz
Pangalactic Punks n' Playboys HUN Reloaded
42
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 22:08:00 -
[485] - Quote
Has any of the devs working on the Uni. Inv. seen Tippia's post about it on her blog yet? http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing
It surely worth a read! |
Krystyn
Serenity Rising LLC Vanguard.
100
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 23:16:00 -
[486] - Quote
Kirin Intarca wrote:I have been a part of many test servers. I have been testing games since Star Wars Galaxies. I am also a student, working through a Game Art & Design degree.
The flaming these forums give to the Devs sickens me. The work that goes into even a small patch like locking pinned windows. Is many man hours of programmers behind a desk operating on coffee, spending a lot of time away from their families. Just to make us, the players, a little more happy about our game. The Devs do not ignore the player feedback. Every Dev listens as they are artists, they are designers. feedback is the backbone of game development. They may take longer than you, the player, may like in fixing a known issue; but take a moment and consider what it takes to make a game. for example:
Assassin's Creed Revelations was in concept and being in the first stages of design two years before Assassin's Creed 1 was released. alpha testing of a game, starts a year or two before closed betas on some games. An "easy" patch to a live MMO server, can take weeks to create and insure will work so that the devs don't have to patch thier patch, and even then it is not an exact science.
Game Design and Development is an art form. It takes time from feedback to implementation. I don't care how long you have waited for the unified inventory to be fixed, or if Minmatar capital ships will be reshaded, or whatever. The Devs know about it, they are working on it. Give them a break and let them work. Use constructive feedback to give them good criticism.
The unified inventory is a great addition, it took some getting used to, and it could still use some refining. Most notably on lag/refresh rates. However, I absolutely love how it works. I can switch cargo contents from 6 different ships very quickly because I only have to open one inventory window, instead of the drone bay and cargo bay, and items inventory and ship hanger to gather the fit I just bought in Jita, and had sitting in the station.
The new mining ship changes both to frigates and barge/exhumers. To CPP and every Concept Designer, Player feedback, and programmer..... Thank you, this is a genius move and will really change the way mining is done. I can't wait to get final numbers.
Last note, Don't whine, gripe, and sob about a problem when talking to the devs. For those who may not know 'Dev' is short for Developer... If you have a problem, offer a real solution. If you can't, then simply mention the issue and let it drop, so the Devs can get to work on it. They develop,
You are describing why there is a test server...not why they failed to use it as such.
And in what world do you live where the unified inventory was anything but a complete, utter and total failure?
Now I will agree with you some of the actual developers are not to blame, management failure for forcing out incomplete and untested MASSIVE GAME BREAKING changes is more of problem. Not the guys writing out the code that makes our wonderful.
|
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
111
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 23:24:00 -
[487] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:and why do you want fewer options in the esc menu? thats the place for the most options if there ever was one. thats where the maximum of customization options should occur.
We have been moving more towards having a separate Settings tab located in the window / interface itself that the settings are affecting. That way all options available in that Settings tab are for the window / interface it resides in only. The Esc Menu should preferably be mostly for global settings that affect the whole client. CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
111
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 23:27:00 -
[488] - Quote
Olga Ivanovna wrote:Yes! But also: Double-click on container (not only wreck) in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
Yes, that would work as well, everything that currently needs holding in the Shift key to open up a secondary window would do so with this Settings option. CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp. Ethereal Dawn
75
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 00:43:00 -
[489] - Quote
http://pastebin.com/frBc2muR |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
746
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 01:35:00 -
[490] - Quote
Kirin Intarca wrote:I have been a part of many test servers. I have been testing games since Star Wars Galaxies. I am also a student, working through a Game Art & Design degree.
The flaming these forums give to the Devs sickens me. The work that goes into even a small patch like locking pinned windows. Is many man hours of programmers behind a desk operating on coffee, spending a lot of time away from their families. Just to make us, the players, a little more happy about our game. The Devs do not ignore the player feedback. Every Dev listens as they are artists, they are designers. feedback is the backbone of game development. They may take longer than you, the player, may like in fixing a known issue; but take a moment and consider what it takes to make a game. for example:
Assassin's Creed Revelations was in concept and being in the first stages of design two years before Assassin's Creed 1 was released. alpha testing of a game, starts a year or two before closed betas on some games. An "easy" patch to a live MMO server, can take weeks to create and insure will work so that the devs don't have to patch thier patch, and even then it is not an exact science.
Game Design and Development is an art form. It takes time from feedback to implementation. I don't care how long you have waited for the unified inventory to be fixed, or if Minmatar capital ships will be reshaded, or whatever. The Devs know about it, they are working on it. Give them a break and let them work. Use constructive feedback to give them good criticism.
The unified inventory is a great addition, it took some getting used to, and it could still use some refining. Most notably on lag/refresh rates. However, I absolutely love how it works. I can switch cargo contents from 6 different ships very quickly because I only have to open one inventory window, instead of the drone bay and cargo bay, and items inventory and ship hanger to gather the fit I just bought in Jita, and had sitting in the station.
The new mining ship changes both to frigates and barge/exhumers. To CPP and every Concept Designer, Player feedback, and programmer..... Thank you, this is a genius move and will really change the way mining is done. I can't wait to get final numbers.
Last note, Don't whine, gripe, and sob about a problem when talking to the devs. For those who may not know 'Dev' is short for Developer... If you have a problem, offer a real solution. If you can't, then simply mention the issue and let it drop, so the Devs can get to work on it. They develop,
Having a degree in Mechanical Engineering (BSME), and then going back to school and getting a second degree in Game Art & Design (BFA), I have to say that I'm more critical than ever of the development team. Particularly because I went to school and have practical experience developing games, and the creative effort and the design philosophy is usually lacking. Usually, the things I'm most critical about are game mechanics decisions, but regardless, the number of glaring art issues and other defects are such that if I turned in an assignment with such mistakes, I'd get an F in any of my art asset classes. I actually submitted ships from Eve to my art instructors once for a critique of the designs and they were universally derided as 'crap', and this is just speaking from a purely technical art design sense- e.g. basic approaches to shape, form, flow etc.
So no, I won't give them a break. The world doesn't give me a break. Why should anyone else get different? I imagine that the shortcomings of the organization that is CCP isn't from the line developers, but from the mid and senior level leadership. The technicians- the coders and artists, are surely passionate about what they do. It's the decision makers that ruin their talent by wasting it in useless directions. Intelligence shouldn't be free. -á Mining, reloaded. -á-áADDICTED. |
|
Lord Vyper
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 02:18:00 -
[491] - Quote
Inspiration wrote: You can call me an aggressive debater that responds personal to personal attacks, but that is about it.
Your argument is invalid but I don't frequent the forums enough to carry on with you. +1 epeen points to you. Everyone else who has read your numerous posts will draw their conclusions. Don't ever presume you have a clue as to what enlisted military life is. You enlist live the life then you get the right to an opinion otherwise your answer should be "I don't know" and your lips close tightly. Many other things could be said but would only continue this endless cycle.
Anyway this convo is not the purpose of this thread so were done.
Hulk ore bay could be increased to hold at least 3 cycles of ICE (9000 m3) since this seems to be a very large concern from people. Also perhaps increasing the cargo hold to 500 m3 for crystal storage. my 2 cents.
|
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
278
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 02:53:00 -
[492] - Quote
Kirin Intarca wrote: The flaming these forums give to the Devs sickens me. The work that goes into even a small patch like locking pinned windows. Is many man hours of programmers behind a desk operating on coffee, spending a lot of time away from their families. Just to make us, the players, a little more happy about our game.
/sigh. They do it for a PAY CHECK. I wonder how many dev's would show up to work if they didn't get paid? And the flaming is because they tried to fix what wasn't broken, and broke the **** out of it. Since they out of hand ignored all reasonable feedback, we stopped being reasonable.
CCP Explorer wrote:Some of these changes are live on SiSi, others are still only on CCP Punkturis' computer (CCP Optimal is on paternity leave so Punkturis is temporarily stepping in to make those changes).
That, oddly, fills me with a measure of of hope. HUZZAH! Hopefully that isn't just blind optimism turning me into a fool. I hope Punkturis isn't going to make me go to her office and give her the most devastating puppy dog eyes I can pull off >.>
CCP Arrow wrote:We have been moving more towards having a separate Settings tab located in the window / interface itself that the settings are affecting. That way all options available in that Settings tab are for the window / interface it resides in only. The Esc Menu should preferably be mostly for global settings that affect the whole client.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't such customization options be in a separate menu so they aren't taking up screen space on every window? Moving all the options (and there should be a LARGE number of options involved with your current incarnation of an inventory) to the window itself just sounds wasteful. You can't make it customizable to any notable degree without drowning us in clutter.
ANYWAYS! Any word on returning right click access and neocom shortcuts? Such a better method of using the inventory than the tree ever will be. |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
560
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 06:31:00 -
[493] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012. So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:
- Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.
Is this accurate for how the setting would function? This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree. With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable?
Hm.. CCP Arrow you have to know that I do not like to use the tree view. My proposal would be to set this checkbox to be able to open new windows as default without the need of a tree view, if possible. I mean doubleclicks at ships in stations, wrecks in space, station containers in my station hangar etc. Simple all thinks, associated to the inventory, open in a new window. I would like to be able to turn off / hide the tree view complete but be able to open new windows via doubleclick at the responding icons again. I do not use the integrated filters to search for any assets. I use named containers. But now it is a little bit weird to navigate through them and back. I have no idea what should be the behavior of this "AutoShift" if you click at the tree. Because I do not like the tree very much. If you just implement the option to open new windows via doubleclick I do not need to use the tree anymore. I would simple doublecklick again to open seperate windows again. That would be enough for me. I do not need more options. I could drag & drop things around between my two windows and I would be happy again.
I am not an native english speaking person. So I have to say sorry for some strange wordings. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
Olga Ivanovna
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 10:39:00 -
[494] - Quote
Also please: Double-click my own ship in space should open the cargo hold!
Right now it's a hassle... if I open my inventory in space it's the Uni. Inv that opens, not the cargo hold window (the window I configured and positioned earlier when I was docked). |
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
114
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 11:14:00 -
[495] - Quote
Olga Ivanovna wrote:Also please: Double-click my own ship in space should open the cargo hold!
Right now it's a hassle... if I open my inventory in space it's the Uni. Inv that opens, not the cargo hold window (the window I configured and positioned earlier when I was docked).
Currently on TQ, if you hold the Shift key while Double-clicking your own ship you will open up a secondary inventory window which should be as you configured it before, if you however do not hold Shift, you open up the primary inventory window (Unified Inventory) which does also persist, but only in the location of the primary window, and not the cargo hold that you expected.
So this does currently work, if you open up a secondary type window, but that only happens by holding in the Shift key.. So this setting that we are adding will make this the primary behavior, so there would not be a need for holding the Shift key to get the secondary windows. CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
Lord Helghast
Dirty Old Bastards Nulli Secunda
109
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 12:59:00 -
[496] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Olga Ivanovna wrote:Also please: Double-click my own ship in space should open the cargo hold!
Right now it's a hassle... if I open my inventory in space it's the Uni. Inv that opens, not the cargo hold window (the window I configured and positioned earlier when I was docked). Currently on TQ, if you hold the Shift key while Double-clicking your own ship you will open up a secondary inventory window which should be as you configured it before, if you however do not hold Shift, you open up the primary inventory window (Unified Inventory) which does also persist, but only in the location of the primary window, and not the cargo hold that you expected. So this does currently work, if you open up a secondary type window, but that only happens by holding in the Shift key.. So this setting that we are adding will make this the primary behavior, so there would not be a need for holding the Shift key to get the secondary windows.
Silly question here arrow...
Has CCP considered adding some sort of differentiating character to the "primary" inventory window, as it can get a bit confusing, even a small icon or something to just denote "hey i'm the the primary window", or leave the primary window as is, and the secondary windows add a small "hey i'm a secondary window" icon or something. |
Lord Helghast
Dirty Old Bastards Nulli Secunda
109
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 13:02:00 -
[497] - Quote
Jonuts wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:We have been moving more towards having a separate Settings tab located in the window / interface itself that the settings are affecting. That way all options available in that Settings tab are for the window / interface it resides in only. The Esc Menu should preferably be mostly for global settings that affect the whole client. Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't such customization options be in a separate menu so they aren't taking up screen space on every window? Moving all the options (and there should be a LARGE number of options involved with your current incarnation of an inventory) to the window itself just sounds wasteful. You can't make it customizable to any notable degree without drowning us in clutter.
I like this, as long as the "tab/popup botton" is small and consisten, like a little wrench in the corner of said window that toggles the settings mode / popup whatever... And not a giant tab strip across the top of the damn window lol... just add a small wrench next to the minimize/maximize or something. |
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
114
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 13:21:00 -
[498] - Quote
Lord Helghast wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:Olga Ivanovna wrote:Also please: Double-click my own ship in space should open the cargo hold!
Right now it's a hassle... if I open my inventory in space it's the Uni. Inv that opens, not the cargo hold window (the window I configured and positioned earlier when I was docked). Currently on TQ, if you hold the Shift key while Double-clicking your own ship you will open up a secondary inventory window which should be as you configured it before, if you however do not hold Shift, you open up the primary inventory window (Unified Inventory) which does also persist, but only in the location of the primary window, and not the cargo hold that you expected. So this does currently work, if you open up a secondary type window, but that only happens by holding in the Shift key.. So this setting that we are adding will make this the primary behavior, so there would not be a need for holding the Shift key to get the secondary windows. Silly question here arrow... Has CCP considered adding some sort of differentiating character to the "primary" inventory window, as it can get a bit confusing, even a small icon or something to just denote "hey i'm the the primary window", or leave the primary window as is, and the secondary windows add a small "hey i'm a secondary window" icon or something.
Currently the difference is that all secondary windows open up with the Index Tree minimized. If users keep the primary with the Index Tree visible, they will always know if they are opening a primary or secondary window.
CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
Morugnir
Negotiatores Infinitum
25
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 13:45:00 -
[499] - Quote
http://s2.hostingkartinok.com/uploads/images/2012/07/284d639d3f1fd2182c0a5fc745838f8f.jpg Translate from russian: From now they looks like... Crush me totaly! Let the butthurt flow through you... |
Olga Ivanovna
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 14:05:00 -
[500] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Olga Ivanovna wrote:Also please: Double-click my own ship in space should open the cargo hold!
Right now it's a hassle... if I open my inventory in space it's the Uni. Inv that opens, not the cargo hold window (the window I configured and positioned earlier when I was docked). Currently on TQ, if you hold the Shift key while Double-clicking your own ship you will open up a secondary inventory window which should be as you configured it before, if you however do not hold Shift, you open up the primary inventory window (Unified Inventory) which does also persist, but only in the location of the primary window, and not the cargo hold that you expected. So this does currently work, if you open up a secondary type window, but that only happens by holding in the Shift key.. So this setting that we are adding will make this the primary behavior, so there would not be a need for holding the Shift key to get the secondary windows.
Confirmed: But now I can see why I didn't figure it out before... have you tried it yourself? Half of the time I'm double-clicking the ship, it's actually a click into space and the ship goes there. It's important that you click exactly on the right spot. If you single-click the ship first, a marker shows up and shift + double-clicking on it does the trick. Also, it's not possible to open cargo while warping - which it should be.
It shouldn't be this hard. I would also like to see a right-click option on the ship with "open cargo" if it's this tricky to hit exactly with the shift + double-click... |
|
Scaugh
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
26
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 14:50:00 -
[501] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Lord Helghast wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:Olga Ivanovna wrote:Also please: Double-click my own ship in space should open the cargo hold!
Right now it's a hassle... if I open my inventory in space it's the Uni. Inv that opens, not the cargo hold window (the window I configured and positioned earlier when I was docked). Currently on TQ, if you hold the Shift key while Double-clicking your own ship you will open up a secondary inventory window which should be as you configured it before, if you however do not hold Shift, you open up the primary inventory window (Unified Inventory) which does also persist, but only in the location of the primary window, and not the cargo hold that you expected. So this does currently work, if you open up a secondary type window, but that only happens by holding in the Shift key.. So this setting that we are adding will make this the primary behavior, so there would not be a need for holding the Shift key to get the secondary windows. Silly question here arrow... Has CCP considered adding some sort of differentiating character to the "primary" inventory window, as it can get a bit confusing, even a small icon or something to just denote "hey i'm the the primary window", or leave the primary window as is, and the secondary windows add a small "hey i'm a secondary window" icon or something. Currently the difference is that all secondary windows open up with the Index Tree minimized. If users keep the primary with the Index Tree visible, they will always know if they are opening a primary or secondary window.
I don't use the tree AT ALL... I just want to know what is classed as a secondary window and how and from where it is opened. |
Droxlyn
TOHA Heavy Industries TOHA Conglomerate
101
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 15:44:00 -
[502] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable?
Yes, I didn't know I could double-click to expand it to begin with. |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
398
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 16:06:00 -
[503] - Quote
CCP Arrow, I was wondering if you could also add the ability to open Ships Hangar and Items Hangar directly from the neocom in a secondary window?
Reason I am asking for this is to bring one of the old functionalities back (where you had items hangar and ships hangar just above the undock icon) This way the people who still dislike the new inventory have the option to never see it... (win win for everyone)
I really think the removal of these shortcuts was one of the major issues (besides the removal of right click shortcuts on ships) When you remove something that is used by almost everyone, people become annoyed and angry :) so adding back these will help alot!... I will basicly not have anything to complain about in the new Unified Inventory then...
TL;DR Give us back ships and items hangar shortcuts on the neocom, (while still keeping Inventory shortcut) and make these open as secondary windows. 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 |
Resgo
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 16:34:00 -
[504] - Quote
CCP Arrow And while he's talking about abilities while right clicking on ships could we please please please get the ability to remotely save ship fits from inventory. It's impossible to link a fit for a ship that someone did not link to you or in which you cannot which is pretty silly. |
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
172
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 16:41:00 -
[505] - Quote
what if we have two windows open with the tree view expanded? Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Ships to goo calc - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=107898 |
OlRotGut
26
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 17:04:00 -
[506] - Quote
Siyis Rholh wrote:The inferno feature pages are so useless. Every time I go to them (I'm a slow learner, ok) I automatically assume I should click on them for more info... but there isn't any, just another feature page with a picture mildly relevant to the topic and a one sentence article telling us what we already knew from what the link said.
Add more info to them or scrap them because as they are now any 5 minutes spent making a "feature" page is 5 minutes wasted.
If you can't take the time to add info yourself, at least throw in some links to the work people in the community have done, like image galleries for the new Angel ships or datamined ship changes.
I wanted to point out for feedback, that I agree with this poster about the inferno feature pages.
We're eve players; we want real information, details, specifics; the current iteration leaves much to be desired.
|
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
114
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 17:18:00 -
[507] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:CCP Arrow, I was wondering if you could also add the ability to open Ships Hangar and Items Hangar directly from the neocom in a secondary window?
Yes, I want to add it to the Neocom again. Originally the plan was to only have items in the Neocom that could always be there both in station and in space because new users got confused when Items hangar and Ship hangar disappeared from the Neocom on undock. We also got feedback from players not wanting these two buttons being locked at the bottom and so close to the Undock button so we had decided to make them behave like other Neocom buttons, that users could move around in the icons list. However, when we tried that we saw that managing their location was quite tricky when they would disappear from the Neocom Menu on undock, the list would shift making icons below it move upwards and change their position (if users didn't have them at the bottom of the icons list). If users would then change the position of other icons in the Neocom, perhaps put a new Icon at the bottom, knowing where the Items hangar and Ship hangar should appear again on docking was tricky. Some players remember the position of certain Neocom icon instead of the look of the icon itself.
It became something that wasn't trivial to find a graceful and consistent solution to and we thought the shortcuts to open the Ship hangar and Items hangar directly as secondary windows would be sufficient along with the ability to open them from the Unified Inventory, but it was a wrong call and for that I'm sorry.
So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space). That way you can still know where they are located compared to other Neocom icons, but also know that you can't click them at that time. This would mean that these two icons would behave differently from everything else in the Neocom, so kind of inconsistent, but I'm guessing you would be fine with that?
TL;DR: Users that want to have Items hangar and Ship hangar in the Neocom (even though they disappear (or grey out) on Dock/Undock) should be allowed to do so and it is in our iteration plan to allow players to move them to the Neocom root again.
Until this is fixed you can use Alt-N for Ship hangar and Alt-G for Item hangar to open them up directly as secondary windows, and because they are secondary windows, they remember their state, position, size etc. individually. CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Senior UX Designer-á|-á @CCP_Arrow |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
365
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 17:23:00 -
[508] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Bubanni wrote:CCP Arrow, I was wondering if you could also add the ability to open Ships Hangar and Items Hangar directly from the neocom in a secondary window? Yes, I want to add it to the Neocom again. Originally the plan was to only have items in the Neocom that could always be there both in station and in space because new users got confused when Items hangar and Ship hangar disappeared from the Neocom on undock. We also got feedback from players not wanting these two buttons being locked at the bottom and so close to the Undock button so we had decided to make them behave like other Neocom buttons, that users could move around in the icons list. However, when we tried that we saw that managing their location was quite tricky when they would disappear from the Neocom Menu on undock, the list would shift making icons below it move upwards and change their position (if users didn't have them at the bottom of the icons list). If users would then change the position of other icons in the Neocom, perhaps put a new Icon at the bottom, knowing where the Items hangar and Ship hangar should appear again on docking was tricky. Some players remember the position of certain Neocom icon instead of the look of the icon itself. It became something that wasn't trivial to find a graceful and consistent solution to and we thought the shortcuts to open the Ship hangar and Items hangar directly as secondary windows would be sufficient along with the ability to open them from the Unified Inventory, but it was a wrong call and for that I'm sorry. So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space). That way you can still know where they are located compared to other Neocom icons, but also know that you can't click them at that time. This would mean that these two icons would behave differently from everything else in the Neocom, so kind of inconsistent, but I'm guessing you would be fine with that? TL;DR: Users that want to have Items hangar and Ship hangar in the Neocom (even though they disappear (or grey out) on Dock/Undock) should be allowed to do so and it is in our iteration plan to allow players to move them to the Neocom root again. Until this is fixed you can use Alt-N for Ship hangar and Alt-G for Item hangar to open them up directly as secondary windows, and because they are secondary windows, they remember their state, position, size etc. individually. That would work. Could they disappear if you have the ships and items hanger stuck to the Station services panel.
Any word on when the secondary window icon will be changed and what it icon will look like.
|
Murashu
Phoibe Enterprises
47
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 17:37:00 -
[509] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote: So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space). That way you can still know where they are located compared to other Neocom icons, but also know that you can't click them at that time. This would mean that these two icons would behave differently from everything else in the Neocom, so kind of inconsistent, but I'm guessing you would be fine with that?
Greying them out would be better than not having them at all. While you are fixing the Neocom, any chance we could get our date back? |
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
172
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 17:40:00 -
[510] - Quote
whats wrong with putting the ships and items button above the undock ? though not as close as last time, a spacer in there would be nice.
putting it back there or having the option to have it back there. seriously this is all sisi stuff, not tq. Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Ships to goo calc - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=107898 |
|
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
176
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 17:41:00 -
[511] - Quote
While we are at Neocom stuff, when are we getting HORIZONTAL neocom? Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |
TheSmokingHertog
TALIBAN EXPRESS
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 17:51:00 -
[512] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Bubanni wrote:CCP Arrow, I was wondering if you could also add the ability to open Ships Hangar and Items Hangar directly from the neocom in a secondary window? Yes, I want to add it to the Neocom again. Originally the plan was to only have items in the Neocom that could always be there both in station and in space because new users got confused when Items hangar and Ship hangar disappeared from the Neocom on undock. We also got feedback from players not wanting these two buttons being locked at the bottom and so close to the Undock button so we had decided to make them behave like other Neocom buttons, that users could move around in the icons list. However, when we tried that we saw that managing their location was quite tricky when they would disappear from the Neocom Menu on undock, the list would shift making icons below it move upwards and change their position (if users didn't have them at the bottom of the icons list). If users would then change the position of other icons in the Neocom, perhaps put a new Icon at the bottom, knowing where the Items hangar and Ship hangar should appear again on docking was tricky. Some players remember the position of certain Neocom icon instead of the look of the icon itself. It became something that wasn't trivial to find a graceful and consistent solution to and we thought the shortcuts to open the Ship hangar and Items hangar directly as secondary windows would be sufficient along with the ability to open them from the Unified Inventory, but it was a wrong call and for that I'm sorry. So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space). That way you can still know where they are located compared to other Neocom icons, but also know that you can't click them at that time. This would mean that these two icons would behave differently from everything else in the Neocom, so kind of inconsistent, but I'm guessing you would be fine with that? TL;DR: Users that want to have Items hangar and Ship hangar in the Neocom (even though they disappear (or grey out) on Dock/Undock) should be allowed to do so and it is in our iteration plan to allow players to move them to the Neocom root again. Until this is fixed you can use Alt-N for Ship hangar and Alt-G for Item hangar to open them up directly as secondary windows, and because they are secondary windows, they remember their state, position, size etc. individually.
Sounds good, but about the position, can you not position them in the extra menu on top, so people can drag in on when they want to? then new players dont have the hassle about the new button.
Secundairy, grey out buttons would be no problem for me, but I assume there will be people who would like to remove them from the neocom alltogether at that point. |
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
21
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 17:56:00 -
[513] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Bubanni wrote:CCP Arrow, I was wondering if you could also add the ability to open Ships Hangar and Items Hangar directly from the neocom in a secondary window? Yes, I want to add it to the Neocom again. Originally the plan was to only have items in the Neocom that could always be there both in station and in space because new users got confused when Items hangar and Ship hangar disappeared from the Neocom on undock. We also got feedback from players not wanting these two buttons being locked at the bottom and so close to the Undock button so we had decided to make them behave like other Neocom buttons, that users could move around in the icons list. However, when we tried that we saw that managing their location was quite tricky when they would disappear from the Neocom Menu on undock, the list would shift making icons below it move upwards and change their position (if users didn't have them at the bottom of the icons list). If users would then change the position of other icons in the Neocom, perhaps put a new Icon at the bottom, knowing where the Items hangar and Ship hangar should appear again on docking was tricky. Some players remember the position of certain Neocom icon instead of the look of the icon itself. It became something that wasn't trivial to find a graceful and consistent solution to and we thought the shortcuts to open the Ship hangar and Items hangar directly as secondary windows would be sufficient along with the ability to open them from the Unified Inventory, but it was a wrong call and for that I'm sorry. So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space). That way you can still know where they are located compared to other Neocom icons, but also know that you can't click them at that time. This would mean that these two icons would behave differently from everything else in the Neocom, so kind of inconsistent, but I'm guessing you would be fine with that? TL;DR: Users that want to have Items hangar and Ship hangar in the Neocom (even though they disappear (or grey out) on Dock/Undock) should be allowed to do so and it is in our iteration plan to allow players to move them to the Neocom root again. Until this is fixed you can use Alt-N for Ship hangar and Alt-G for Item hangar to open them up directly as secondary windows, and because they are secondary windows, they remember their state, position, size etc. individually.
This would be quite acceptable, might even have the tooltip read "not available in space" when it's greyed out.
And while we're on the general idea, can corp hangars, ore bays and drone bays be put back into the rightclick menu for ships/structures? |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
176
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 18:02:00 -
[514] - Quote
TheSmokingHertog wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:Bubanni wrote:CCP Arrow, I was wondering if you could also add the ability to open Ships Hangar and Items Hangar directly from the neocom in a secondary window? Yes, I want to add it to the Neocom again. Originally the plan was to only have items in the Neocom that could always be there both in station and in space because new users got confused when Items hangar and Ship hangar disappeared from the Neocom on undock. We also got feedback from players not wanting these two buttons being locked at the bottom and so close to the Undock button so we had decided to make them behave like other Neocom buttons, that users could move around in the icons list. However, when we tried that we saw that managing their location was quite tricky when they would disappear from the Neocom Menu on undock, the list would shift making icons below it move upwards and change their position (if users didn't have them at the bottom of the icons list). If users would then change the position of other icons in the Neocom, perhaps put a new Icon at the bottom, knowing where the Items hangar and Ship hangar should appear again on docking was tricky. Some players remember the position of certain Neocom icon instead of the look of the icon itself. It became something that wasn't trivial to find a graceful and consistent solution to and we thought the shortcuts to open the Ship hangar and Items hangar directly as secondary windows would be sufficient along with the ability to open them from the Unified Inventory, but it was a wrong call and for that I'm sorry. So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space). That way you can still know where they are located compared to other Neocom icons, but also know that you can't click them at that time. This would mean that these two icons would behave differently from everything else in the Neocom, so kind of inconsistent, but I'm guessing you would be fine with that? TL;DR: Users that want to have Items hangar and Ship hangar in the Neocom (even though they disappear (or grey out) on Dock/Undock) should be allowed to do so and it is in our iteration plan to allow players to move them to the Neocom root again. Until this is fixed you can use Alt-N for Ship hangar and Alt-G for Item hangar to open them up directly as secondary windows, and because they are secondary windows, they remember their state, position, size etc. individually. Sounds good, but about the position, can you not position them in the extra menu on top, so people can drag in on when they want to? then new players dont have the hassle about the new button. Secundairy, grey out buttons would be no problem for me, but I assume there will be people who would like to remove them from the neocom alltogether at that point.
First of all Item Hangar button can open ship hangar while in space. Ship Hangar can remain greyed out
Remeber there are a lot of situation when we want to open inwentory in space: POS managing Looting Using friendly ships hangars
In this situation this button could open nearest container / pos structure / etc Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
398
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 18:06:00 -
[515] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Bubanni wrote:CCP Arrow, I was wondering if you could also add the ability to open Ships Hangar and Items Hangar directly from the neocom in a secondary window? Yes, I want to add it to the Neocom again. Originally the plan was to only have items in the Neocom that could always be there both in station and in space because new users got confused when Items hangar and Ship hangar disappeared from the Neocom on undock. We also got feedback from players not wanting these two buttons being locked at the bottom and so close to the Undock button so we had decided to make them behave like other Neocom buttons, that users could move around in the icons list. However, when we tried that we saw that managing their location was quite tricky when they would disappear from the Neocom Menu on undock, the list would shift making icons below it move upwards and change their position (if users didn't have them at the bottom of the icons list). If users would then change the position of other icons in the Neocom, perhaps put a new Icon at the bottom, knowing where the Items hangar and Ship hangar should appear again on docking was tricky. Some players remember the position of certain Neocom icon instead of the look of the icon itself. It became something that wasn't trivial to find a graceful and consistent solution to and we thought the shortcuts to open the Ship hangar and Items hangar directly as secondary windows would be sufficient along with the ability to open them from the Unified Inventory, but it was a wrong call and for that I'm sorry. So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space). That way you can still know where they are located compared to other Neocom icons, but also know that you can't click them at that time. This would mean that these two icons would behave differently from everything else in the Neocom, so kind of inconsistent, but I'm guessing you would be fine with that? TL;DR: Users that want to have Items hangar and Ship hangar in the Neocom (even though they disappear (or grey out) on Dock/Undock) should be allowed to do so and it is in our iteration plan to allow players to move them to the Neocom root again. Until this is fixed you can use Alt-N for Ship hangar and Alt-G for Item hangar to open them up directly as secondary windows, and because they are secondary windows, they remember their state, position, size etc. individually.
Yes :) greyed out would be fine <3 and looking forward to them being back, also I think it is fine for now that we can't get them next to the undock, as long as we get the ability later :) 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 |
Rock Kicker
Full Bore Inc Sobriety Test Failures
47
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 18:51:00 -
[516] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:
So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space). That way you can still know where they are located compared to other Neocom icons, but also know that you can't click them at that time. This would mean that these two icons would behave differently from everything else in the Neocom, so kind of inconsistent, but I'm guessing you would be fine with that?
Absolutely! |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 20:45:00 -
[517] - Quote
Murashu wrote:
Greying them out would be better than not having them at all. While you are fixing the Neocom, any chance we could get our date back?
Do you mean the date when you hover over the time? If so, it's been back a while.
|
Droxlyn
TOHA Heavy Industries TOHA Conglomerate
101
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 21:27:00 -
[518] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:[
So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space). That way you can still know where they are located compared to other Neocom icons, but also know that you can't click them at that time. This would mean that these two icons would behave differently from everything else in the Neocom, so kind of inconsistent, but I'm guessing you would be fine with that?
TL;DR: Users that want to have Items hangar and Ship hangar in the Neocom (even though they disappear (or grey out) on Dock/Undock) should be allowed to do so and it is in our iteration plan to allow players to move them to the Neocom root again.
Until this is fixed you can use Alt-N for Ship hangar and Alt-G for Item hangar to open them up directly as secondary windows, and because they are secondary windows, they remember their state, position, size etc. individually.
Could the ship button open up the closest SMB or SMA in space that you can use? |
Murashu
Phoibe Enterprises
48
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 22:50:00 -
[519] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Murashu wrote:
Greying them out would be better than not having them at all. While you are fixing the Neocom, any chance we could get our date back?
Do you mean the date when you hover over the time? If so, it's been back a while.
Nope, the date as it was before CCP Optimal decided to completely remove it. |
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
282
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 00:02:00 -
[520] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:
Currently on TQ, if you hold the Shift key while Double-clicking your own ship you will open up a secondary inventory window which should be as you configured it before, if you however do not hold Shift, you open up the primary inventory window (Unified Inventory) which does also persist, but only in the location of the primary window, and not the cargo hold that you expected.
So this does currently work, if you open up a secondary type window, but that only happens by holding in the Shift key.. So this setting that we are adding will make this the primary behavior, so there would not be a need for holding the Shift key to get the secondary windows.
FYI, that's Bass Ackwards. So bass ackwards.
Lord Helghast wrote:
I like this, as long as the "tab/popup botton" is small and consisten, like a little wrench in the corner of said window that toggles the settings mode / popup whatever... And not a giant tab strip across the top of the damn window lol... just add a small wrench next to the minimize/maximize or something.
That definitely sounds reasonable and workable. Almost like a good idea in fact :D
CCP Arrow wrote: Currently the difference is that all secondary windows open up with the Index Tree minimized. If users keep the primary with the Index Tree visible, they will always know if they are opening a primary or secondary window.
Wow. Secondary windows essentially exist solely for people who don't want **** to do with the tree in the first place and already have it minimized. Honestly, I see no point in differentiating between primary/secondary windows, but hey, I'm not a serious power user, nor do I even understand the difference. Return neocom and right click shortcuts, and problems are solved. Instead we get all this primary/secondary window crap. Bleh. I'm too sober to make sense of this gibberish :(
CCP Arrow wrote:
Yes, I want to add it to the Neocom again. Originally the plan was to only have items in the Neocom that could always be there both in station and in space because new users got confused when Items hangar and Ship hangar disappeared from the Neocom on undock. We also got feedback from players not wanting these two buttons being locked at the bottom and so close to the Undock button so we had decided to make them behave like other Neocom buttons, that users could move around in the icons list. However, when we tried that we saw that managing their location was quite tricky when they would disappear from the Neocom Menu on undock, the list would shift making icons below it move upwards and change their position (if users didn't have them at the bottom of the icons list). If users would then change the position of other icons in the Neocom, perhaps put a new Icon at the bottom, knowing where the Items hangar and Ship hangar should appear again on docking was tricky. Some players remember the position of certain Neocom icon instead of the look of the icon itself.
It became something that wasn't trivial to find a graceful and consistent solution to and we thought the shortcuts to open the Ship hangar and Items hangar directly as secondary windows would be sufficient along with the ability to open them from the Unified Inventory, but it was a wrong call and for that I'm sorry.
So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space). That way you can still know where they are located compared to other Neocom icons, but also know that you can't click them at that time. This would mean that these two icons would behave differently from everything else in the Neocom, so kind of inconsistent, but I'm guessing you would be fine with that?
TL;DR: Users that want to have Items hangar and Ship hangar in the Neocom (even though they disappear (or grey out) on Dock/Undock) should be allowed to do so and it is in our iteration plan to allow players to move them to the Neocom root again.
Until this is fixed you can use Alt-N for Ship hangar and Alt-G for Item hangar to open them up directly as secondary windows, and because they are secondary windows, they remember their state, position, size etc. individually.
Holy. ****. I never thought I'd see an answer to this, having only seen it asked about five thousand times! So, to answer everything:
Why would there be a problem at all with greying out a button when you're undocked? Makes perfect sense. Hell, disappearing buttons are fine too. Or not have them disappear or grey out, and just not work. Hard to interact with my item hangar when I'm not at the station after all. People will figure it out, because this isn't rocket science. The inconsistency is acceptable, because they're fundamentally different from everything else on the neocom. Has there EVER been a time when they were treated the same as every other icon? I highly doubt that you've had a section of the player base constantly disparage your parentage because the ship hangar and item hangar buttons disappeared when you undock. Yet I do notice that quite a few players disparage your parentage since you've removed them. Obviously what you had before worked a **** ton better than what you have now...This is no brainer bullshit that should have been fixed on the test server. Instead, we're not even fixed two months later. Don't remove working solutions because they aren't perfect. IMPROVE THEM. I swear, if I did my job the way you people do, I'd go to jail for criminal negligence.
As for the hotkeys, I've been using them for a while. About 10 seconds after alt-c opened inventory instead of cargo (which had a great deal of cussing from me).
Now, whats your excuse for removing right click shortcuts? Afraid someone sniffing too much glue might open a drone bay instead of their ore bay? |
|
Wiu Ming
Dead Guy Syndicate
14
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 00:21:00 -
[521] - Quote
Kirin Intarca wrote:The flaming these forums give to the Devs sickens me... Sorry to have hurt your feelings there buddy, but...
Kirin Intarca wrote:The Devs do not ignore the player feedback... You're talking about EVE Online, right? Aside from Punkturis and a few others, it seems like ignoring player feedback is exactly what 'The Devs' do best. There were numerous posts about the terribleness of the new UI while it was being tested on Sisi, yet 'The Devs' put their hands to their ears & pulled a "LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA LA" yet again.
Kirin Intarca wrote:The unified inventory is a great addition... ... in your opinion. And you're certainly entitled, and I'm sure there are lots of players who would agree with you. However...
Kirin Intarca wrote:Don't whine, gripe, and sob about a problem when talking to the devs... when you've got literally hundreds, maybe even thousands of your player base telling you IF IT AIN'T BROKE FOR THE LOVE OF CHRIST DON'T EFFING 'FIX IT' yet they do it anyway (again), incredulity leads to frustration leads to anger. Again.
It's up to CCP to decide whether they'll listen to their player base or not. When rage boiled over and resulted in the Jita riots, CCP actually said "ok - we get it, sorry!!! this won't happen again, we promise!!" and most of us instantly forgave and forgot. There were piles of praise heaped on the devs for that simple acknowledgement, which is what makes the UI fiasco even more frustrating and difficult to comprehend.
The behavior CCP is instilling (has instilled?) in us is this: b!tch and we'll ignore you, totally lose your minds and rage at us, drop your accounts, scream at us in whatever forums you possibly can, and maybe if we're in a good mood, we'll listen. And that, good sir, is something your paying customers should never be subjected to. |
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 00:58:00 -
[522] - Quote
Wiu Ming wrote: when you've got literally hundreds, maybe even thousands of your player base telling you IF IT AIN'T BROKE FOR THE LOVE OF CHRIST DON'T EFFING 'FIX IT' yet they do it anyway (again), incredulity leads to frustration leads to anger. Again.
It's up to CCP to decide whether they'll listen to their player base or not. When rage boiled over and resulted in the Jita riots, CCP actually said "ok - we get it, sorry!!! this won't happen again, we promise!!" and most of us instantly forgave and forgot. There were piles of praise heaped on the devs for that simple acknowledgement, which is what makes the UI fiasco even more frustrating and difficult to comprehend.
The behavior CCP is instilling (has instilled?) in us is this: b!tch and we'll ignore you, totally lose your minds and rage at us, drop your accounts, scream at us in whatever forums you possibly can, and maybe if we're in a good mood, we'll listen. And that, good sir, is something your paying customers should never be subjected to.
+1
If I'd done this kind of work at any job I'd ever worked at I'd be taking a long vacation called looking for another. |
Miss Everest
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 03:15:00 -
[523] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:EVE Online: Inferno 1.2 will be deployed on Wednesday, August 8. ... Check our Inferno 1.2 feature page for more information! Also watch our forums and further announcement for a detailed deployment schedule and the full patch notes. ...
The problem with this comment is there is literally no information on the site to look at. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions Alliance of Abandoned Cybernetic Rejects
752
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 04:30:00 -
[524] - Quote
Honestly, the issue with ships and items icons being awkward has everything to do with the Station Services section of the Station panel needing a complete rework.
If that was resolved then you could have items hangar and ships hangar buttons be on the station panel and consistently there, meanwhile the current station services could be organized better/more useful, etc.
You've done a great job with all parts of the User Interface, but the Station services section suffers horribly still from being totally haphazardly unorganized and could be handled much better and is clearly a left over from an age gone by.
I personally use Merge Items and Ships into Station Panel and this resolves my ability to access those panels quickly and easily. At this point I'd recommend setting that as a default setting for users since many people don't even know the option is there, and it would give them a way to have quick access to items and ships.
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
rafael Elarik
Eternity Trade Consortium
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 05:49:00 -
[525] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Tippia wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:I'm on Team Super Friends.
We worked on War Dec changes and new modules. We also made new Kill Reports to go with the War Reports that were a part of the War Dec UI.
My team had nothing to do with the unified inventory. Ok. That just means the opaqueness is one layer up GÇö in what team does what and who is on what team. I just got that impression from somewhere, and that may have been wrong, but the general gist of it all is the same. The broader solution to all this is for people to stop imagining they have a perfect grasp of the minutate of EVE development and holding individual developers personally accountable for development decisions and outcomes. Nobody, from Hellmar and Unifex down, gets to make decisions completely unilaterally, and nobody ever hits a "perfect game" and gets to ship a feature that turns out exactly the way they wanted it to. Making an MMO is a very complex operation with lots of moving parts that have to mesh together very tightly - everything has to be done as a team, and it's never as straightforward as you'd like to hope.
Your right I don't hold individual devs responsible...I hold them ALL responsible, as a collective.It really doesn't matter if you are dev A that didn't work on item Z,you are a ccp representative and that's sufficient. This is called "responsibility "..when you are in a position of responsibility you need to be able to accept some heat...yes even if you aren't personally responsible. It's part of being a company representative. |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
561
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:07:00 -
[526] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote: So, an idea I want to throw out there: If we would add them into the Neocom again, would it be OK if the Items hangar and Ship hangar would be greyed out in the Neocom when they are not accessible? (while in space).
This sound like an acceptable solution. Good idea. I support this idea.
CCP Arrow wrote: Until this is fixed you can use Alt-N for Ship hangar and Alt-G for Item hangar to open them up directly as secondary windows, and because they are secondary windows, they remember their state, position, size etc. individually.
I do not use shortcuts very often. I ever tought that EVE is a game, played via mouse. Therefore I use just a very small amount of shortcuts. I prefer mouse clicks. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
174
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:11:00 -
[527] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1302413#post1302413
Posted: 2012.05.15 11:37
most of these "new" changes were asked for before you posted this. is your backlog really 3 months?
btw i still really love this quote, (bolded)
CCP Arrow wrote:Not only did we collect all feedback from the Forums, personal posts, Twitter comments and other sources but we took the issues many of you like Grey Stormshadow, Tippia and other have been pointing out and created a User Testing plan which we facilitated last week. In the sessions the whole team observed the live feed and took notes on everything the participants did. We don't do User Tests because we don't believe you when you say there is a problem, we want to address it correctly and by seeing it in action with our own eyes, we can more easily find a solution to the problems you have found.
true its a soundbite, so ive included the context.
It has been three months and the useability issues are still there. and you are just getting around to asking us if we want neocom buttons? worried that we might not want them? i hope there was a long relaxing vacation in these last months, cause nothing else could possibly explain ...
i think ill go play halo. i cant believe that ive been posting about this for three months and you are still working through the day of testserver feedback. I have got to be insane. Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Ships to goo calc - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=107898 |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
561
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:48:00 -
[528] - Quote
Hello Kusum,
I must say that I am one of the haters of this unified inventory. I can't stand it! But if I read all statements from the posting CCP's / Dev's in this thread I must also say that I am carefully optimistic, that CCP is now REALLY working on things to improve the current inventoryand to bring back former functionality.
- CCP Arrow said that he and his team is willed to bring an option, compareable to an "autoShift", to be able to open new seperate windows WITHOUT any shift+click again. - Furthermore he asked what should also be influenced from this new "autoShift" checkbox. - After that we might get our Icons in the neocom back too.
One option I do not really understand is.. We are also adding the ability to drag tabs out of the index tree to open them as new secondary windows, that will always work, with or without this setting turned on.
THESE changes will bring back the former functionality of the old UI / inventory. (Depending on how good CCP is able to (re)implement these features ) I think CCP got their (deserved) fire from day one (release of this unified UI on 22.05.2012) and now really likes to end the unhappiness of their customers. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
Nankeen Heron
Jim's Mowing
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 13:13:00 -
[529] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:EVE Online: Inferno 1.2 will be deployed on Wednesday, August 8.
Was it deployed? I haven't seen a patch and/or client update.
|
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
561
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 13:51:00 -
[530] - Quote
Nankeen Heron wrote:CCP Phantom wrote:EVE Online: Inferno 1.2 will be deployed on Wednesday, August 8. Was it deployed? I haven't seen a patch and/or client update. Today we have Wednesday, August 1. The patch will come next week. I can't play EVE at present. Because of THIS: http://i50.tinypic.com/2ez1wz4.jpg |
|
Sarik Olecar
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 13:52:00 -
[531] - Quote
Nankeen Heron wrote:CCP Phantom wrote:EVE Online: Inferno 1.2 will be deployed on Wednesday, August 8. Was it deployed? I haven't seen a patch and/or client update.
Lets take my Timemachine and find out!
Set Date: One week into the future! |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
365
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 15:16:00 -
[532] - Quote
New rigs are still missing their bill of materials tab
BR #141823 |
Kirin Intarca
Armored Core Inc. Industrial Technonauts
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 16:03:00 -
[533] - Quote
Wiu Ming wrote:Kirin Intarca wrote:The flaming these forums give to the Devs sickens me... Sorry to have hurt your feelings there buddy, but... Kirin Intarca wrote:The Devs do not ignore the player feedback... You're talking about EVE Online, right? Aside from Punkturis and a few others, it seems like ignoring player feedback is exactly what 'The Devs' do best. There were numerous posts about the terribleness of the new UI while it was being tested on Sisi, yet 'The Devs' put their hands to their ears & pulled a "LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA LA" yet again. Kirin Intarca wrote:The unified inventory is a great addition... ... in your opinion. And you're certainly entitled, and I'm sure there are lots of players who would agree with you. However... Kirin Intarca wrote:Don't whine, gripe, and sob about a problem when talking to the devs... when you've got literally hundreds, maybe even thousands of your player base telling you IF IT AIN'T BROKE FOR THE LOVE OF CHRIST DON'T EFFING 'FIX IT' yet they do it anyway ( again ), incredulity leads to frustration leads to anger. Again. It's up to CCP to decide whether they'll listen to their player base or not. When rage boiled over and resulted in the Jita riots, CCP actually said "ok - we get it, sorry!!! this won't happen again, we promise!!" and most of us instantly forgave and forgot. There were piles of praise heaped on the devs for that simple acknowledgement, which is what makes the UI fiasco even more frustrating and difficult to comprehend. The behavior CCP is instilling (has instilled?) in us is this: b!tch and we'll ignore you, totally lose your minds and rage at us, drop your accounts, scream at us in whatever forums you possibly can, and maybe if we're in a good mood, we'll listen. And that, good sir, is something your paying customers should never be subjected to.
|
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
283
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 16:40:00 -
[534] - Quote
Kirin Intarca wrote:
ok I did type a good rebuttal and I don't want to type the whole thing again but the short version...
I agree the Devs need to be a little more open with their minds and let the players see that they are listening. It will help with the flaming and the frustration.
The changes to things that are not broken are so the game can continue to evolve. If nothing changed that isn't broken a competitor playing eve can brainstorm and eventually steal a lot of players from EVE. CCP need to make money to keep the game going and pay their developers hence a Uni.Inv. It didn't need fixed, but the change they made makes many things easier. IT still needs polishing and a few more features, but over all i am satisfied on what it is attempting to do. They just need to get the fine tuning down and patched.
CCP you're doing a great job. Try to be very open and explain not just the what is changing but the why you think it is better for the game. Both in the game world, and the real life world. Again, because it will help satisfy and reduce player frustration.
I have one suggestion for the Uni.Inv . If I type a filter into the search block, could it transfer to the other segments of the tree as well. For example: I type Antimatter to filter out everything but my antimatter charges in my ship cargo bay to check ammo supply. I would like it if that filter carried over to my item hanger so it automatically will filter to my antimatter charges so i can quickly grab more ammo. Other than that, As I am a security officer in my Corp. Opening the corp hanger takes a while to populate because the server must query all the member hangers as well. it is about a 10 to 15 second delay to expand the corp hanger tree. What can be done to improve performance in that issue?
Changes to whats not broken are dangerous. You have to carefully think it out, and be willing to go through several iterations on the test server to make sure you're delivering a new and BETTER product. What did we get saddled with this inventory? They didn't carefully think it out, and they were unwilling to go through several iterations on the test server, leaving us with broken pile of **** that hasn't even had basic functionality restored yet! So even the argument of "To prevent stagnation" is a foolish argument. It's like cutting off your own arm because you got complacent with your life. Don't break something you use ALL THE TIME, do something new instead! Frankly, this game doesn't need new features if CCP isn't willing to put in the work to make them useable. So far, to the player base, they've proven unwilling to make the inventory useable. |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
3046
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 10:59:00 -
[535] - Quote
Salpun wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:Salpun wrote:CCP Arrow wrote:Callidus Dux wrote:CCP Arrow wrote: The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. In this case, having a separate 'Shift' setting that only applies to the Inventory would be optimal.
Yeah! You have hit it! Shift+click is for me just a problem for the inventory. All other SHift+Clicks are acceptable and can stay as it was till 22.05.2012. So with the setting turned on, these things would work without holding Shift:
- Clicking on the Cargo button in the HUD, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double-click on wreck in Overview, would open up a new secondary cargo window.
- Double clicking on the name of a tab in the Index tree of the Inventory, would open up the content of that tab in a new secondary inventory window.
Is this accurate for how the setting would function? This would change the behavior of double-click in the index tree, when the setting is turned off, double-click would expand the tree (if there is one) when double-clicking on the name of a tab in the index tree. With it turned on however, it opens up the content of the tab in a new secondary inventory window. That means that if it has a sub-tree, the user would need to click on the sub-tree arrow to collapse it. Would that be acceptable? Sounds about right We are also adding the ability to drag tabs out of the index tree to open them as new secondary windows, that will always work, with or without this setting turned on. Add the orca Corp hanger back to the right click and I think you have a winner. Are these changes live on Sisi?
Orca Corp Hangar and Ship Maintenance Bay have been added back to right click internally, should be on Sisi soonGäó
Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
365
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 11:12:00 -
[536] - Quote
Thanks Orca pilots thank you. Was the drone bay on right click when you do not have a drone bay defect fixed as well? |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
3047
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 11:12:00 -
[537] - Quote
Salpun wrote:Thanks Orca pilots thank you. Was the drone bay on right click when you do not have a drone bay defect fixed as well?
yes Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
178
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 17:03:00 -
[538] - Quote
Thank you CCP Punkturis Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Ships to goo calc - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=107898 |
rafael Elarik
Eternity Trade Consortium
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 18:07:00 -
[539] - Quote
i have to admit this is one of the only games ive played where the devs seems to really interact with the general populace,quite refreshing.If the "passing the buck" type of attitude does'nt continue they might even garner a measure of professionalism.I for one am very apperciative of your feedback,but dont shed your negative community feedback onto others,it's very un-professional.Dont take this as an insult,take this as free customer relations advice.While smiley faces and cute symbols etc are nice what people really want are results. |
Yezenia
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 18:23:00 -
[540] - Quote
Jonuts wrote:
Changes to whats not broken are dangerous. You have to carefully think it out, and be willing to go through several iterations on the test server to make sure you're delivering a new and BETTER product. What did we get saddled with this inventory? They didn't carefully think it out, and they were unwilling to go through several iterations on the test server, leaving us with broken pile of **** that hasn't even had basic functionality restored yet! So even the argument of "To prevent stagnation" is a foolish argument. It's like cutting off your own arm because you got complacent with your life. Don't break something you use ALL THE TIME, do something new instead! Frankly, this game doesn't need new features if CCP isn't willing to put in the work to make them useable. So far, to the player base, they've proven unwilling to make the inventory useable.
This is what happens when you set internal deadlines and then aren't willing to push a release back when something isn't ready for release. I can appreciate the desire to meet the deadlines, but not when they end up releasing an "improved" feature in May that is so broken that the original functionality can't be restored until the winter expansion. |
|
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
286
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 19:15:00 -
[541] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:
Orca Corp Hangar and Ship Maintenance Bay have been added back to right click internally, should be on Sisi soonGäó
I <3 you. Marry me? You get put on the case, and days later ***** almost fixed. <3 <3 <3 <3
That being said, are all the other bays being returned to right click as well? |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
3061
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 20:02:00 -
[542] - Quote
Jonuts wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:
Orca Corp Hangar and Ship Maintenance Bay have been added back to right click internally, should be on Sisi soonGäó
I <3 you. Marry me? You get put on the case, and days later ***** almost fixed. <3 <3 <3 <3 That being said, are all the other bays being returned to right click as well?
I think so, you should try it out on Sisi and see if you see any more missing
(btw I'm not "on the case" I'm just the only user interface programmer in the office this week because of vacations so I'm helping out with a few things ) Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
287
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 20:10:00 -
[543] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:Jonuts wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:
Orca Corp Hangar and Ship Maintenance Bay have been added back to right click internally, should be on Sisi soonGäó
I <3 you. Marry me? You get put on the case, and days later ***** almost fixed. <3 <3 <3 <3 That being said, are all the other bays being returned to right click as well? I think so, you should try it out on Sisi and see if you see any more missing (btw I'm not "on the case" I'm just the only user interface programmer in the office this week because of vacations so I'm helping out with a few things )
Hey, someone said you were working on it while someone else is out the office, and you make more progress in two days than the normal team did in two months. You're on the case as far as I'm concerned :D |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
3062
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 20:15:00 -
[544] - Quote
Jonuts wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:Jonuts wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:
Orca Corp Hangar and Ship Maintenance Bay have been added back to right click internally, should be on Sisi soonGäó
I <3 you. Marry me? You get put on the case, and days later ***** almost fixed. <3 <3 <3 <3 That being said, are all the other bays being returned to right click as well? I think so, you should try it out on Sisi and see if you see any more missing (btw I'm not "on the case" I'm just the only user interface programmer in the office this week because of vacations so I'm helping out with a few things ) Hey, someone said you were working on it while someone else is out the office, and you make more progress in two days than the normal team did in two months. You're on the case as far as I'm concerned :D
aww thanks but that's not really fair they've been working hard on trying to make things right, there is a bunch of fixes coming from them next week!
Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
403
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 20:56:00 -
[545] - Quote
I also know arrow and the inventory guys already did add those things, punkt simply fixed their fix, isn't that right somewhat? 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 |
Jonuts
The Arrow Project
290
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:14:00 -
[546] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:Jonuts wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:Jonuts wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:
Orca Corp Hangar and Ship Maintenance Bay have been added back to right click internally, should be on Sisi soonGäó
I <3 you. Marry me? You get put on the case, and days later ***** almost fixed. <3 <3 <3 <3 That being said, are all the other bays being returned to right click as well? I think so, you should try it out on Sisi and see if you see any more missing (btw I'm not "on the case" I'm just the only user interface programmer in the office this week because of vacations so I'm helping out with a few things ) Hey, someone said you were working on it while someone else is out the office, and you make more progress in two days than the normal team did in two months. You're on the case as far as I'm concerned :D aww thanks but that's not really fair they've been working hard on trying to make things right, there is a bunch of fixes coming from them next week!
Maybe, but the IMPORTANT fixes show up when you do. Coincidence? I think not. <3 |
Kirin Intarca
Armored Core Inc. Industrial Technonauts
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 23:01:00 -
[547] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:
Having a degree in Mechanical Engineering (BSME), and then going back to school and getting a second degree in Game Art & Design (BFA), I have to say that I'm more critical than ever of the development team. Particularly because I went to school and have practical experience developing games, and the creative effort and the design philosophy is usually lacking. Usually, the things I'm most critical about are game mechanics decisions, but regardless, the number of glaring art issues and other defects are such that if I turned in an assignment with such mistakes, I'd get an F in any of my art asset classes. I actually submitted ships from Eve to my art instructors once for a critique of the designs and they were universally derided as 'crap', and this is just speaking from a purely technical art design sense- e.g. basic approaches to shape, form, flow etc.
So no, I won't give them a break. The world doesn't give me a break. Why should anyone else get different? I imagine that the shortcomings of the organization that is CCP isn't from the line developers, but from the mid and senior level leadership. The technicians- the coders and artists, are surely passionate about what they do. It's the decision makers that ruin their talent by wasting it in useless directions.
Yes I agree, as far as the basic art principles it is rather... non-traditional. But again, its art. While your instructors are saying they are crap because of approaches on shape and color theory would be correct, if they didn't "break the mold" and went more traditional, everyone would just be saying they are flying an X-Wing, or the Millennium Falcon in EVE. Even look at the Nxy super carrier, it is quite reminiscent of the Millennium Falcon. So they aren't trying to get an A from their previous art professors they are trying to make a unique game.
I am more critical of the mechanics og games since I started my GAD degree, however I am not going to jump into criticizing their customer service on our level, when the issue is the heads at the top of the CCP food chain. Most of the Devs and CCP personnel that actually get down and post in these forums are probably in a daily battle with cooperate heads in giving them more resources to fight for the players and not worry quite as much about the bottom line of projected profitability.
A question for CCP: Do the owners/Board of Directors ever read these forums or even play EVE? |
Kirin Intarca
Armored Core Inc. Industrial Technonauts
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 23:13:00 -
[548] - Quote
Jonuts wrote: Changes to whats not broken are dangerous. You have to carefully think it out, and be willing to go through several iterations on the test server to make sure you're delivering a new and BETTER product. What did we get saddled with this inventory? They didn't carefully think it out, and they were unwilling to go through several iterations on the test server, leaving us with broken pile of **** that hasn't even had basic functionality restored yet! So even the argument of "To prevent stagnation" is a foolish argument. It's like cutting off your own arm because you got complacent with your life. Don't break something you use ALL THE TIME, do something new instead! Frankly, this game doesn't need new features if CCP isn't willing to put in the work to make them useable. So far, to the player base, they've proven unwilling to make the inventory useable.
Sorry I missed your post in my previous responses.
Yes I fully agree, sometimes even the best companies try to push out something too soon. Personally I would prefer too soon than too late. Good example is the latest Duke Nukem game. It would have been awesome... if it had been released the year it was intended to and not ten years later.
However, looking at a few things that could have been worked on a bit longer: Battlefield 3 online multi-player Server stability. the first few Android Smart Phones The Personal Computer (and i mean the ones waaaaaaay back when) ****XBOX 360*****<----- big fiasco with that one
even though they released a little to early with a good number of bugs, eventually they got fixed and maybe even faster than they would have discovered in Testing. Now the test server had an outcry on the bugs and they still released too early. Opps, that was a mistake CCP you may have been able to hold onto the idea for a few more weeks/months but still released it. However, it is out now, let them continue to work on it and improve it. We already got CCP fixing the orca and corp hangers. Lets see what happens on the 8th for Uni.Inv. |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
365
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 16:19:00 -
[549] - Quote
Some players on sisi are getting a 1 Hz flicker on undock with the latest patch. Graphics cards FX 2700M and Nvidia 460. My client is fine though. |
JaseNZ
The Suicide Kings Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 22:51:00 -
[550] - Quote
Salpun wrote:Some players on sisi are getting a 1 Hz flicker on undock with the latest patch. Graphics cards FX 2700M and Nvidia 460. My client is fine though.
Mine flickers like a mofo. Windows 7 64bit ATI Radeon HD6970x2 using Catalyst 12.6 drivers. |
|
Olga Ivanovna
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.04 15:38:00 -
[551] - Quote
Salpun wrote:Some players on sisi are getting a 1 Hz flicker on undock with the latest patch. Graphics cards FX 2700M and Nvidia 460. My client is fine though.
I have this already on Tranquility. :(
AMD Radeon HD 6870 |
Rezecor
Rim Worlds Republic Solar Citizens
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.05 05:14:00 -
[552] - Quote
Decreasing crystals size *AND* decreasing cargo hold is not what I had in mind in my earlier post. While slightly better than it was at first, this is still a NERF to those of us who use crystals. They're already a hassle and don't need to be made worse. Yes, I know it can be mitigated (extras in haulers, jetcans), but they'll still be harder to use. |
Moustapha Jadayel
Bubble Wrap Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.05 16:02:00 -
[553] - Quote
Why add mining rig only for mercoxit miners? Why not add a general mining rig that would improve mining yield for-áany types of crystals we are using? |
Lilianna Star
State War Academy Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 05:02:00 -
[554] - Quote
I have to say, I am really looking forward to the surplus of minerals as a result of this.
I'll be able to produce all the ships I want for cheap :D |
rafael Elarik
Eternity Trade Consortium
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 10:16:00 -
[555] - Quote
JaseNZ wrote:Salpun wrote:Some players on sisi are getting a 1 Hz flicker on undock with the latest patch. Graphics cards FX 2700M and Nvidia 460. My client is fine though. Mine flickers like a mofo. Windows 7 64bit ATI Radeon HD6970x2 using Catalyst 12.6 drivers.
in before the "my team did'nt work on this response" respond now punkturis dont just let others take the heat,step up,tell us what you know and gain a new measure of respect OR maintain the status quo and shovel the blame on others.Balls in your court. |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
3131
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 14:28:00 -
[556] - Quote
rafael Elarik wrote:JaseNZ wrote:Salpun wrote:Some players on sisi are getting a 1 Hz flicker on undock with the latest patch. Graphics cards FX 2700M and Nvidia 460. My client is fine though. Mine flickers like a mofo. Windows 7 64bit ATI Radeon HD6970x2 using Catalyst 12.6 drivers. in before the "my team did'nt work on this response" respond now punkturis dont just let others take the heat,step up,tell us what you know and gain a new measure of respect OR maintain the status quo and shovel the blame on others.Balls in your court.
lol, are you asking me for a response to something I have no knowledge of? I don't know how that's going to help anyone
unfortunately I can only speak for features I work on since those are the things I know, sadly I don't know everything Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Jagoff Haverford
The Terrifying League Of Dog Fort Get Off My Lawn
28
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 14:32:00 -
[557] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:unfortunately I can only speak for features I work on since those are the things I know, sadly I don't know everything Really? You should ask around the office. There seem to be plenty of your co-workers who believe that they know everything.
|
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
3132
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 14:40:00 -
[558] - Quote
Jagoff Haverford wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:unfortunately I can only speak for features I work on since those are the things I know, sadly I don't know everything Really? You should ask around the office. There seem to be plenty of your co-workers who believe that they know everything.
that guy I was replying to called me unprofessional earlier in the thread because I wouldn't answer for a feature I didn't work on. I don't know who he thinks I am but I'm just a regular programmer.. on one team.. working on our features.. and I think it would rather be unprofessional if I would be sticking my nose in what all the other teams are working on or answering for what they do. Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Jagoff Haverford
The Terrifying League Of Dog Fort Get Off My Lawn
28
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 14:50:00 -
[559] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote: that guy I was replying to called me unprofessional earlier in the thread because I wouldn't answer for a feature I didn't work on. I don't know who he thinks I am but I'm just a regular programmer.. on one team.. working on our features.. and I think it would rather be unprofessional if I would be sticking my nose in what all the other teams are working on or answering for what they do.
Oh my. I'm honestly very sorry. I didn't mean it that way. You are truly the top of the heap when it comes to forum responsiveness, and you are of course all too right that you shouldn't comment on things that you aren't directly involved with.
You have my heartfelt apologies.
If there were more developers like you, and fewer that took the "know it all" approach, this game would be much, much better.
|
Jagoff Haverford
The Terrifying League Of Dog Fort Get Off My Lawn
28
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 14:53:00 -
[560] - Quote
Moustapha Jadayel wrote:Why add mining rig only for mercoxit miners? Why not add a general mining rig that would improve mining yield for-áany types of crystals we are using? Or even a rig that allowed them to sacrifice ore hold capacity to gain a fractional increase in crystal-carrying cargo capacity?
|
|
Kristen Andelare
Abacus Industries Group Aerodyne Collective
17
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 18:23:00 -
[561] - Quote
For those looking for the details from the materials tab on the new rigs, they're on Sisi now.
Unresearched (10% waste)
Medium Ice Harvester Cycle Time Rig: Conductive Polymer 13 Fried Interface Circuit 18 Smashed Trigger Unit 9 Tripped Power Circuit 22
Medium Mercoxit Mining Rig: Conductive Polymer 13 Defective Current Pump 8 Fried Interface Circuit 18 Tripped Power Circuit 22
4 ingredients per rig, that's new.
|
Dex Tera
Clann Fian
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 23:20:00 -
[562] - Quote
rafael Elarik wrote:JaseNZ wrote:Salpun wrote:Some players on sisi are getting a 1 Hz flicker on undock with the latest patch. Graphics cards FX 2700M and Nvidia 460. My client is fine though. Mine flickers like a mofo. Windows 7 64bit ATI Radeon HD6970x2 using Catalyst 12.6 drivers. in before the "my team did'nt work on this response" respond now punkturis dont just let others take the heat,step up,tell us what you know and gain a new measure of respect OR maintain the status quo and shovel the blame on others.Balls in your court.
why are you being such a prick to punkturis i mean theres a hundred beter ways you could have typed ur msg but the way u did it was quite rude and clearly you have no idea how things work at ccp and as for "gaining a new measure of respect" punkturis is probably one of if not the most respected devs at ccp in respect to her direct, clear and informative posts and if she maintains her status quo she would still be miles ahead of many devs at ccp and nor have i once seen her shovel the blame on some one else for anything douch
keep up the good work punkturis o7 |
Johan Civire
Dirty Curse inc.
69
|
Posted - 2012.08.06 23:31:00 -
[563] - Quote
Steijn wrote:Madlof Chev wrote:Oh, people are still whining about the inventory. I'm glad I don't come to these forums often, I can only take so much repetitive bleating from degenerates with a bee in their panties. im only still here because i was stupid enough to re-subscribe just before they released it. Trust me, if it isnt sorted by the time the subs run out, you wont have to worry about me anymore.
I love people QQ about this and never NEVER read any dev post its just a stupid QQ read the damn devs post more offen that will help.... |
Chokichi Ozuwara
Royal One Piece Corporation Deadly Unknown
400
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 00:08:00 -
[564] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:The 'Shift' Setting discussion is to get a better idea of what solves the problem for most. You should have never put the shift in, in the first place.
It's a serious pain in the ass, and because you guys have made windows and inventory so slow, it's impossible to do quick shift-clicks and expect consistent window results. Looting is painful due to these Infernal changes.
I appreciate how patient and polite you've been, and apparently you know you've borked this up royally, but please don't spare anything trying to fix it. Your approach is wrong to the entire problem, as much as possible try to roll the entire methodology of this insane single window view back and give the players control over how we handle our inventory.
Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round. |
Chokichi Ozuwara
Royal One Piece Corporation Deadly Unknown
400
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 00:20:00 -
[565] - Quote
Also @CCP Arrow, you guys are loved around here when you are accountable. If the conversation in this thread had happened a month ago, a lot of people would have chilled out over the inventory changes.
But because no one communicated (except Soundwaffe's PR stuff which I think most of us are tone deaf to) that this would be fixed, and no direct dialog was established, players assumed they would be ignored, because frankly, that has been a standard your company has followed at times.
The sooner you guys get in front of us regarding problems, and identify real community thought leaders (like Tippia, not CSM who no one cares about or talks to) on how to address them, the sooner the stress and anger level goes down.
The only way to solve these problems is to be direct and transparent. If that's the standard, respect for all devs will rise much higher. This (despite Explorer using Punkturis criticism for points in this thread) is why Punkturis and other Devs are treated so well. Yes, they may not be working on the most controversial stuff, but they are always accessible, and that pressure release of knowing you've been heard is a big deal to your users. Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round. |
Steijn
Quay Industries
183
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 10:04:00 -
[566] - Quote
edit: deleted as cant be arsed arguing with trolls anymore. |
ctx2007
Wychwood and Wells Beer needs you
100
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 17:56:00 -
[567] - Quote
What happened to download Tuesday? |
Sexy Cakes
Poasting
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 18:43:00 -
[568] - Quote
Patch notes link in original post please!
You're slipping Phantom. |
Jace Errata
Lawlz Brawlz
245
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 19:01:00 -
[569] - Quote
I wish CCP would stop removing the unique. Yes, this is 1.2 related. Stealth OST puns and blatant lies since 2009 Jace Errata on Twitter
One day they woke me up so I could live forever It's such a shame the same will never happen to you |
|
CCP Explorer
C C P C C P Alliance
832
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 19:40:00 -
[570] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:rafael Elarik wrote:JaseNZ wrote:Salpun wrote:Some players on sisi are getting a 1 Hz flicker on undock with the latest patch. Graphics cards FX 2700M and Nvidia 460. My client is fine though. Mine flickers like a mofo. Windows 7 64bit ATI Radeon HD6970x2 using Catalyst 12.6 drivers. in before the "my team did'nt work on this response" respond now punkturis dont just let others take the heat,step up,tell us what you know and gain a new measure of respect OR maintain the status quo and shovel the blame on others.Balls in your court. lol, are you asking me for a response to something I have no knowledge of? I don't know how that's going to help anyone unfortunately I can only speak for features I work on since those are the things I know, sadly I don't know everything This should be fixed on SiSi now. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Software Director | EVE Online, CCP Games | Follow on: Twitter / Google+ |
|
|
Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
69
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 07:46:00 -
[571] - Quote
Do you plan to keep machariel size like it is now on TQ or will it be permanently sized down ?
|
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 12:39:00 -
[572] - Quote
This is totally lame: "Ethnic Relations skill changed into Diplomatic Relations. The old effect of segregating corporations by races is gone, so all corporations can have all races, always. The skill now reduces the cost to hire allies in war. The skill will not be reimbursed as it is not being removed, but changed."
I would have not trained the skill at all until it was needed. SP should have been reimbursed! People that needed Diplomatic Relations could have reinvested the SP.
|
Hakan MacTrew
Caledonian Heavy Industries Sick N' Twisted
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 16:23:00 -
[573] - Quote
Somethings up with the FW plex spawn times. Been a few hours and nothings respawning.
Is this as intended or is it a bug? |
Starakus
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 18:10:00 -
[574] - Quote
Can we get an option to turn on/off tooltips in the in-flight radial? Its a nice feature for newbies or new fits but it needs a way to be turned off for vet players. It can get rather annoying, redundant, and spammy. |
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
27
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 07:01:00 -
[575] - Quote
Starakus wrote:Can we get an option to turn on/off tooltips in the in-flight radial? Its a nice feature for newbies or new fits but it needs a way to be turned off for vet players. It can get rather annoying, redundant, and spammy.
Agreed, the tooltip takes alot of real estate, either allowing an abbreviated or turn off option would be helpful.
Also, my orca has 7 corp hangar bays why does rightclick only open 1? Finish the job and bind 'em back together or give us the option to bind/unbind corp hangars. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 07:39:00 -
[576] - Quote
Since release CCP likely thinks this thread is dead.....
Jump to here to put feedback where the Dev's are looking (maybe): FEEDBACK
Jump to here to report issues: ISSUES
edit: make it pretty |
Mr Bimble
Lost Ark Enterprises
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 08:04:00 -
[577] - Quote
Diplomatic skill waste.I HAD to train ethnic relations so I could form n industrial corp with my bud.Now its gone and I seem to be able to wardec other corps with money off! Do I really want to mining laser other corps to death for a bargain.Stupid ccp.wankers cunts bastards arseholes fuckwits shitbags. |
Helena Russell Makanen
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
86
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 16:17:00 -
[578] - Quote
Mr Bimble wrote:Diplomatic skill waste.I HAD to train ethnic relations so I could form an industrial corp with my bud.Now its gone and I seem to be able to wardec other corps with money off! Do I really want to mining laser other corps to death for a bargain.This IS a skill replacement not a change in usage.Wardec.... Ethnicity,No connection whatsoever.
+1 - it isn't a slight skill change - it is a completely different skill now. Reimbursement should be a no-brainer.
CCP why didn't you simply create a new skill for War Dec cost or whatever? |
CLERIC01
Free Haven Training Academy
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 08:16:00 -
[579] - Quote
I hate being forced into some thing i might not want to do and think ccp realy f""ked up on altering the cargo hold size's, what if i dont want to mine in a fleet my hulk is now usless to me. |
Matrix Operator
29
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 20:35:00 -
[580] - Quote
Can we unsticky this now? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: [one page] |