Where they not talking about releasing them on this patch? CCP, when will they be seeded?

Oh, and FWIW, your import patch BS doesn't work either. Thanks for the craptastic launcher. I will be back on every big patch to **** and moan about this - just sayin'.

So what changes have been made to the spawning of anomalies in nullsec? I've been scanning down a system in Provi now for a few minutes too many waiting for any of the hubs to respawn and none of them have, there hasn't been any listed for some time now.

Lordy, I hope that we can turn off the weapons meta data contextual pop-up windows. The last thing that I need are big obstructions to clicking and r-clicking in the heat of battle.

Great, but again: you're placing stuff in the region where most players keep their localchat. Which is disappointing.

At this point the only thing that really concerns me about the changes is how this is going to affect the usage of low slots on mining barges and exhumers. Unless expanded cargohold modules are updated to have even just a minimal impact (say 5%) on ore holds they are going to be rendered virtually if not absolutely useless on any and all non-combat mining ships. Likewise the overall reduction in hull HP values, despite the overal increase in armor and shield HP values, makes me wonder just how useful damage controls will be for increasing EHP, as a percentage and not an absolute value, when compared to current numbers.

Frankly, I don't even understand why these ships have such low hull HP values given that ORE ships all currently favor Hull as the HP sink of choice. Does this herald a change to all ORE ships that will result in, for example, the orca's hull HP being reduced while it sees a significant increase in armor and shield HP values or is this just a somewhat arbitrary change in light of "standard" ORE ship design?



Well, presuming that the mining turret statements are typos the skiff and procurer will sit there, mining around as much as a covetor with mining barge 2 (which yes, I know, is technically impossible) would right now and being very, very hard to suicide gank while packing more cargo into it than it currently can now.



Why isn't the overload automatically transferred? Given how much the standard cargo bays were nerfed this would have been a nice bone to toss ore miners.

Also have ice harvesters been fixed so that they no longer shut down prematurely compared to mining lasers and strip miners? It gets pretty annoying fairly fast to have, for example, an 8km3 cargo mackinaw and have your harvesters shut down after just two cycles if you don't dump your cargo between cycles while having 9km3 cargo allows the harvesters to function just fine and continue to initate potential "partial cargo" pulls.



No, he isn't. He's just min-max'ing. This is EVE after all. If you aren't min-max'ing you're playing Hello Kitty Online.

_____

Insofar as the proposed/intended changes to the standings transactions window go, I have to agree that removing information from the players' hands, even if it's just relating to NPC corporations, is a bad move until or unless the tooltips for the transactions window itself can pick up the slack by displaying more, and more accurate, infomration regarding what caused the transaction in question.

Edit: On a secondary note these changes to the inventory UI will be somewhat underwhelming until I can drag/drop fitted modules onto the ship hangar to have them transferred to my item hangar again, double-clicking on ships in the ship hangar opens them up instead of making them my active ship again, and I can stop worrying about the ship hangar section in the list view pane automatically expanding any time it feels like it regardless of whether or not I want it expanded. Ever.

Punkturis trolls!!

She knows the process will take several weeks.