These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

EVE Online: Inferno 1.2 to be deployed on August 8

First post First post
Author
Ryno Caval
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#441 - 2012-07-30 00:34:15 UTC
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
#442 - 2012-07-30 01:15:12 UTC
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
#443 - 2012-07-30 01:59:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Lair Osen
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.
Also AFK miners like you are the reason people stated ganking in the 1st place

Skiff
you can use the procurer for dangerous mining cos its really cheap with a decent cargo and yeild
also "ore hauler with cloaking", its called a t2 transport ship
Lord Vyper
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#444 - 2012-07-30 02:27:34 UTC
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
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#445 - 2012-07-30 04:14:01 UTC
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
#446 - 2012-07-30 06:03:57 UTC
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?

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

Lord Vyper
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#447 - 2012-07-30 06:32:44 UTC
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
Tactically Armed Vanguard
Tactical Narcotics Team
#448 - 2012-07-30 09:12:42 UTC
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 nutsack.
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
#449 - 2012-07-30 10:31:30 UTC
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   |   Director of User Experience   |   EVE Online   |   @CCP_Arrow

Lair Osen
#450 - 2012-07-30 10:35:42 UTC
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
Doomheim
#451 - 2012-07-30 11:41:23 UTC
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
#452 - 2012-07-30 11:45:09 UTC
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.
Steijn
Quay Industries
#453 - 2012-07-30 11:58:14 UTC
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.
#454 - 2012-07-30 13:08:16 UTC
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. It’s 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
#455 - 2012-07-30 13:54:08 UTC
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
#456 - 2012-07-30 15:05:59 UTC
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
#457 - 2012-07-30 15:13:12 UTC
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. It’s 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
#458 - 2012-07-30 15:57:46 UTC
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   |   Director of User Experience   |   EVE Online   |   @CCP_Arrow

Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
SLYCE Pirates
#459 - 2012-07-30 16:02:39 UTC
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 rightBig smile

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.

CCP Arrow
C C P
C C P Alliance
#460 - 2012-07-30 16:07:19 UTC
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 rightBig smile


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   |   Director of User Experience   |   EVE Online   |   @CCP_Arrow