| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Jordan Jansen
1
   |
Posted - 2013.10.30 07:00:00 -
[1] - Quote
Part 1: PI Templates
I think this Idea needs a revival :P
Old Thread from long ago
There are probably other threads with this idea, but my search skills aint that uber, I can't find them!
Having your PI setups stored as templates, similar to how we have saved Ship fittings. OMG that would be super awesome!
I have 5 toons doing PI at the moment, and another 5 are incoming, it takes me HOURS to set it all up properly. and then when you gotta reset, you have to move your setup to a different spot on the planet to get the best extraction results, so much of time spent when you could just click a template and off you go!
Of course you'll have to setup your templates in the beginning, and then you'll probably tweak them every time you apply the template, but it would be much more productive to have a template.
PS. I don't expect the paths and schematics to be saved with the templates, just the structures and links (Extractors/Spaceports/Storage facilities etc.) Setting up the schematics and routing should still be done manually, we can't be making it too easy now, that won't be right!
Part 2: Extractor Formation similar to probes.
I dunno if this is a good or bad idea, but it will definitely make the life of a PI'er easier.
1) Do the normal survey thing.
2) Select the extraction duration.
3) Select the number of heads to use.
4) Click an Extractor formation button to have the extractor heads form in a group
5) Then hold "Shift" and move the whole set of heads around. Release Shift to move the heads around individually.
|
Jordan Jansen
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 07:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
I'm gonna shamelessly bump this... I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that would like to see PI templates! |
Jordan Jansen
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 06:08:00 -
[3] - Quote
And another bump :) |
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
827
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 09:58:00 -
[4] - Quote
I fully support this and that you balanced it with the comment of no to a "Easy Mode" button. Templates would save a lot of RSI (which I think I'm suffering at the moment quite a lot).
Fully supported and saved you another shameless bump   |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Ineluctable.
90
|
Posted - 2013.11.09 09:36:00 -
[5] - Quote
A definite +1 from me. |
Jordan Jansen
5
|
Posted - 2013.11.12 08:42:00 -
[6] - Quote
Thanks for the support :) (And another bump  ) |
Jordan Jansen
5
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 13:15:00 -
[7] - Quote
Le Bump! |
Hexalise
Broken Wheel Mercantile and Trading Company
Illusion of Solitude
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 14:57:00 -
[8] - Quote
+1 |
Kaultyrr Feirynn
Strength Through Factual Unification
Island of Misfit Toons
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 19:54:00 -
[9] - Quote
I know I would be able to spend less time clicking planets and more time mining ore (and getting barges blown up) if we had customizable (and exportable!) structures templates for PI. I am not too excited about moving extractor heads in formation, as I usually use an irregular extractor head formation to begin with.
A colleague of mine has started a forum with many suggestions on how to improve the PI interface. Swing on by and see what he has to say: http://www.kinzland.com/eveoforums/jtr/index.php |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Ineluctable.
115
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 20:03:00 -
[10] - Quote
And also here: I strongly support this idea.
I only have 1 pattern that I employ on all of my planets and rebuilding it is always the most time consuming (albeit rare) work to do with the PI. Custom patterns would come in very handy there. |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
468
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 20:50:00 -
[11] - Quote
additionally, for planetary links. Right now there's a minimum distance that determines the smallest possible CPU/PG usage of a link. Make this be the CPU/PG usage for all sufficiently short links, after which the CPU/PG usage would increase normally.
In other words, make it so it doesn't cost extra powergrid to put a little wiggle room in your PI setups. Trying to place processors on the exact pixel is minimize PG use is bad design.
Why can't I delete this signature? |
Grand Formage
Kinzland
4
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 19:43:00 -
[12] - Quote
Kaultyrr Feirynn, thank you for the plug for my forum. I hope to make it the foremost P idea repository.
As far as the database, it probably would be more like the ship fit info with an image as to the setup. i can't see being all that must to set up although i am not a skilled programmer. I would also see that when the 'fit' was set up, options would be set for programming and routing done in the same operation so one the submit is done, EVErything is completed at once. |
TheFourteenthTry
The 0rigin
Illusion of Solitude
8
|
Posted - 2013.11.24 19:46:00 -
[13] - Quote
Very quick read but I love it. +1
I might actually setup my PI again sometime. It is so annoying to do similar setups more than once, and there are so many possible ways to arrange things, each time I finish one I am dreading ever having to do it again. |
Jordan Jansen
8
|
Posted - 2013.11.25 07:32:00 -
[14] - Quote
oO, thanks for the support everyone!
The more noise we make about improving PI the more likely we are to get a response from CCP on how they are going to change PI for the better :)
I'm pretty sure there are hundreds of people out there who do PI on multiple accounts/toons and I think we all feel the same about how much time it takes to setup our planets.
Today is reset day for me.... I hope I don't need to move whole setups to different spots today, lol |
Freddy Wong
The Flying Dead
Insidious Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.02 11:29:00 -
[15] - Quote
Do this! |
Jordan Jansen
9
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 06:50:00 -
[16] - Quote
So, I think this discussion needs some life again.
PI Templates... we need it :) |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
300
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 09:10:00 -
[17] - Quote
I agree completely with the suggestion and have mad it myself in the S&I survey thread. I also see no reason why we couldn't have schematic layouts saved once you set them up.
I would like very much for the inputs and outputs to default to the largest storage available for a schematic too (same is the hangar being the default in manufacturing).
It woukld also be great to be able to set the number of runs for any given factory. |
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
106
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 11:32:00 -
[18] - Quote
supported!
For posting an idea into F&I:
come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it.....
If your idea can be abused, it WILL be. |
Jordan Jansen
10
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 15:34:00 -
[19] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:...
I would like very much for the inputs and outputs to default to the largest storage available for a schematic too (same is the hangar being the default in manufacturing).
...
oO, I just though of another thing they can add.
Instead of clicking the item then clicking route, it can be drop down box driven.
So the storage will have the items, and in the "Routing" tab you select the place the item needs to go and click an add button, rinse repeat until all sources are filled. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
300
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 17:14:00 -
[20] - Quote
Don't even need the add, simply select the schematic which presents you with a pair of source and destination drop downs defaulted to the biggest storage but with any other storage options also listed. One click to set up the schematic. Would be nice if you could select the number of runs at this point too and get feedback on how much (if any) feedstock is missing for the batch.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |