These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Industry UI

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#161 - 2014-04-28 16:53:41 UTC
Querns wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:

Industrialists do NOT accept risk.

No, you mean YOU don't accept risk. You should be prepared to be outcompeted by those who do.



So, join goonswarm where 3000 blues have your back, so I can oput compete those that don't have 3000 other players watching their back...

Spoken like a true goon.


CCP, seriously.... we're not all goons! Stop listening the their ideas that make the goons more profitable and drive everyone else out of the game.

This change to BPOs is just STUPID!
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#162 - 2014-04-28 16:55:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
LHA Tarawa wrote:
This change to BPOs is just STUPID!
BPOs don't change in the slightest.

…or, well, they become faster to copy, but that's more “handy” than “stupid”.
Dorna Loone
Dark Star Demolition
#163 - 2014-04-28 16:59:25 UTC
Liking very much what I've seen so far. Having everything I need to select or press on a single window, however big it becomes, instead of having to press buttons to open yet more windows (like selecting the factory slot) is a huge step in the right direction
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#164 - 2014-04-28 16:59:47 UTC
Tippia wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Then CCP is doomed to fail, because we do not accept risk.
You keep using that word.
As long as you keep using it, you will be inherently wrong.

Top tip: stop saying “we” when you mean “I”.



Then why did CCP, in the blog where they announced the change, admit that no one is going to be puttiing 100 million+ ISK BPOs into POS?

I can't imagine that they actually thought this through, including the risk of corp theft from not being able to lock-down, and the ramifications of the total annoyance that is going to come from alt-corps that do nothing other than make BPCs.


Whoooo hoooo... fun game. Log in the alt, start a bunch of copies. Take the copies out. Create cotrract.

Talk about extra mindless mouse clicks with no game-play value.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#165 - 2014-04-28 17:00:50 UTC
Tippia wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
This change to BPOs is just STUPID!
BPOs don't change in the slightest.

…or, well, they become faster to copy, but that's more “handy” than “stupid”.


Semantics.

Sorry... left out the word "effecting".
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#166 - 2014-04-28 17:05:37 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Then why did CCP, in the blog where they announced the change, admit that no one is going to be puttiing 100 million+ ISK BPOs into POS?
Good news: there are other BPOs.

Quote:
I can't imagine that they actually thought this through, including the risk of corp theft from not being able to lock-down, and the ramifications of the total annoyance that is going to come from alt-corps that do nothing other than make BPCs.
Sounds like they thought it through fairly well: you can risk it or you can do the extra work. Two options as opposed to none. You have to choose which is worth more to you.

Quote:
Semantics
No. It's just sloppiness and bad argumentation on your part.
TheButcherPete
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#167 - 2014-04-28 17:05:40 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Sylvanium Orlenard wrote:
CCP wants all ISK making activities to have an inherent amount of risk attached to it. In Industry they decided to create that risk by making blueprints have to be in the factory and not in some station under lock down.

Do I agree with it, NO, but I can understand why they would do that, even if I really really hate it.


Then CCP is doomed to fail, because we do not accept risk. We accept lower profit to avoid risk, until the profit becomes too low, then we move back to high sec.

If CCP wants everyone in high sec, then they are on the right track. Just keep putting more hoops for null sec industrialists to have to jump though to stay safe.

This idea they can get us to accept significant risk is beyond ridiculous.


They need to stop listening to GOONS, have 3000 pilots online at any time. Their POV is NOT the POV of the other 30,000 pilots.


Please, post with your main.

Or did Dinsdale get banned, and subsequently drunk? That would explain your utterly terrible posting.

[b]THE KING OF EVE RADIO

If EVE is real, does that mean all of us are RMTrs?[/b]
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#168 - 2014-04-28 17:08:20 UTC
So....from the looks of it, i'll be able to see a maximum of 9 (NINE) blueprints at any given time on your attempt to push the Unified Inventory's "one window to replace them all" mentality. Is this correct?

If so, i ask that you re-think that idea, it just seems horrible.

Also, once this comes out on the test server, PLEASE for the love of all that is good in this world LISTEN to the ppl giving you feedback. Though i will not likely waste my time given that CCP basically said they didn't believe any of the players feedback for two whole months, about the Unified Inventory (more or less the same thing, but this is your attempt to do it with Industry).
Celgar Thurn
Department 10
#169 - 2014-04-28 17:11:49 UTC
At first glance the new UI seems more complicated and not user friendly. I will have to read it again a few times. Smile
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#170 - 2014-04-28 17:12:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Is there maybe an option to add minigame to the industry window, teams could be more efficient if you will point them many things as a overseer and in 10 minutes span you could take a look what they are doing and shout: "get back to work!" if they are drinking coffe or chatting.

Or maybe developing new, optimized code will be apropriate one time per job in the beginning. Logic minigame.

These things would then improve time and efficiency of the instalation even further.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#171 - 2014-04-28 17:13:20 UTC
Tippia wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Then CCP is doomed to fail, because we do not accept risk.
You keep using that word.
As long as you keep using it, you will be inherently wrong.

Top tip: stop saying “we” when you mean “I”.



Expert tip: Don't try to put too many in the same pot by implying that your approach was any better than his. Blink

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#172 - 2014-04-28 17:14:24 UTC
CCP RubberBAND wrote:
Peter Powers wrote:
ok, so now it is shiny and better looking and all,
but uhm, it still seems to lack (or i did misread the post)
one feature that i know me (and others) have been asking for in the past.

What about bulk-creating-jobs?

when i have 10 Scorch M BPC, then doing the same clicking (well i guess dragging now) etc 10 times is *extremly* annoying, so can we please have an option to clone jobs? can this dragging, clicking thing please be a template, and we can create 10 jobs without doing the same stuff over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again?

regards,
PP


The idea is that the system will remember all settings for a blueprint, so if you set up 1 Scorch M BPC, all subsequent blueprints of this type will default to the last submitted job settings.

So you set up the first blueprint, then just hit submit on the subsequent BPCs because everything is set to go.


Maybe make a right click menu option to force this from the menu ;)...

"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X

"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron

-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-
Tora Hamaji
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#173 - 2014-04-28 17:15:44 UTC
As a t2 manufacturer I can say this is impressive progress from the current indy, however

You're missing some VERY important things:

- the ability to stack or batch run multiple BPCs of the same type.

- Queuing jobs up to 24 or 48 hours. (there is nothing like having to put new jobs every 1h 40 mins for those t2 small items)

- Seeing the total materials missing for components (think t2 bs construction. need 1k engines and 2k sensors, what are the total mats i am missing for those?)

- Saving Job Plans

- Make Job Plans updatable. (say you decide to build 3 kronos, over the next days you bought 1k sensors but acquired new t2 mats, what do you need now?)

- Automatic component job installation! This is something that you CCP said were interested in doing!

- Need more corp hangar divisions!

- New pos modules for large operations, with large numbers of slots.

- unified pos hangars, so that all facilities can be operated from 1 storage hangar instead of having to search through 20 labs for that BPC.

- Security issues for indy corps
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#174 - 2014-04-28 17:17:07 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:

Then CCP is doomed to fail, because we do not accept risk. We accept lower profit to avoid risk, until the profit becomes too low, then we move back to high sec.

i accept risk and i'm going to beat your brains out in whatever market i choose to as long as i can get rewarded for my risk-taking

now, i understand npc alts don't like risk but they're barely human

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Cheng Chai
Another Corp..
#175 - 2014-04-28 17:26:47 UTC
I don't like that you call 'Volume' what should be 'Quantity' on this one http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66065/1/Blueprints_ShowInfo_Industry.png

It is misleading.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#176 - 2014-04-28 17:28:00 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:

Then CCP is doomed to fail, because we do not accept risk. We accept lower profit to avoid risk, until the profit becomes too low, then we move back to high sec.

i accept risk and i'm going to beat your brains out in whatever market i choose to as long as i can get rewarded for my risk-taking

now, i understand npc alts don't like risk but they're barely human


You hide too. You hide in goonswarm. Come out and try being in a ten man corp with 30 total toons.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#177 - 2014-04-28 17:36:11 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
You hide too. You hide in goonswarm. Come out and try being in a ten man corp with 30 total toons.
30? Blob moar. Also, post in the other thread since your whinging has nothing to do with the UI.
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#178 - 2014-04-28 17:37:16 UTC
on balance they look like nice changes, we might even see the cost of some T2 stuff falling which might be welcome. we'll have to wait and see I suppose, but the new user interfaces look serviceable, functional and fun, so well done CCP.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Templis CALSF
#179 - 2014-04-28 17:38:48 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Btw, where has the potential Profit part gone in your current final draft? That was something, which could really make the industry window a lot more informative about whether something is worth producing or not - without checking on 3rd party websites or personal spreadsheets. If would of course just give a rough value for the current region you produce in (which limits the usefulness if you don't produce in the region you want to sell your stuff in, naturally; unless you can set a specific sell place for the calculations), but at least you had an indicator on whether it's profitable at all or not.

It would be awful nice not to require 3rd party spread sheets just to determine the production cost of something you're making. It'd make the system much more friendly to casual players

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#180 - 2014-04-28 17:40:20 UTC
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
on balance they look like nice changes, we might even see the cost of some T2 stuff falling which might be welcome. we'll have to wait and see I suppose, but the new user interfaces look serviceable, functional and fun, so well done CCP.


I hope they don't fall even further. It's already pointless to produce many HAC, Logi are hard, Cov Ops borderline and Command Ships completely pointless.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.