These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Phoebe Feedback

First post First post
Author
Jackson Apollo
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#201 - 2014-11-05 17:31:50 UTC
Rocky Eyebrow wrote:

2. Problem solved where there wasnt a problem before.


Actually the problem was that *I* couldn't take them apart.

Now I can have 3 windows and you can have just one.

*passes a tissue*
Mara Kell
Herrscher der Zeit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#202 - 2014-11-05 17:54:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Mara Kell
First of all thanks CCP Punkturis for the quickfix of the market order input arrays and for actually caring about our feedback.

However i think there is lots of potential for improvement of the multi sell window.
I have talked to fellow traders and industrials and i have condensed the most important suggestions in the following picture:

http://i.imgur.com/6iQojtR.png

With the added suggestions the window fits much better into the rest of the eve clients layout. Especially the now left adjusted numbers are very different from all other market related windows. The current windows also wastes quite some precious space.
CCP Punkturis
C C P
C C P Alliance
#203 - 2014-11-05 17:56:53 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Punkturis
Mara Kell wrote:
First of all thanks CCP Punkturis for the quickfix of the market order input arrays and for actually caring about our feedback.

However i think there is lots of potential for improvement of the multi sell window.
I have talked to fellow traders and industrials and i have condensed the most important suggestions in the following window:

http://i.imgur.com/6iQojtR.png

With the added suggestions the window fits much better into the rest of the eve clients layout. Especially the now left adjusted numbers are very different from all other market related windows. The current windows also wastes quite some precious space.



you know your button suggestion is already in there P

(as for your other suggestions we have to keep consistency in the client)

♥ EVE Brogrammer ♥ Team Five 0 ♥ @CCP_Punkturis

Malou Hashur
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#204 - 2014-11-05 18:15:18 UTC
ISD Ezwal wrote:
I have removed a rule breaking post.

The Rules:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.



lawl

CCP Philosophy ==>>

  1. If it works, break it. If it’s broken, leave it and break something else.

  2. Ignore all Forum comments that raise issues and concerns about our "features", and bring said "features" in anyway.

William Ruben
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#205 - 2014-11-05 18:19:05 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

I don't believe this is an intended feature of Phoebe. If they're still missing after a relog, I'd suggest filing a petition.

Thanks for the reply. It might be an API issue with EVEMon; I'm on the road at present but will check when I get home.
Lost Hamster
Hamster Holding Corp
#206 - 2014-11-05 18:24:33 UTC
CCP Punkturis wrote:

you know your button suggestion is already in there P

(as for your other suggestions we have to keep consistency in the client)


Can you please make the quantity number field more WIDE? When you try to sell items in the 10 000 000 range (example tritanium), it's just to small.
SeSca Vanger
Avanto
Hole Control
#207 - 2014-11-05 18:25:10 UTC  |  Edited by: SeSca Vanger
Hi


A BUG (perhaps) i encountered with one of my alts.


NEW PI base links cost around 20 more CPU then before the patch TODAY (quickpatch). I know this due to making identical PI planet earlier today, with same character but falling short heavily on CPU after the patch.

IF it is not a bug, please enforce the new rule to old planets also for the whole game, thx.
Nostromo Fidanza
Blueprint Mania
#208 - 2014-11-05 18:33:29 UTC
CCP Punkturis wrote:
Mara Kell wrote:
First of all thanks CCP Punkturis for the quickfix of the market order input arrays and for actually caring about our feedback.

However i think there is lots of potential for improvement of the multi sell window.
I have talked to fellow traders and industrials and i have condensed the most important suggestions in the following window:

http://i.imgur.com/6iQojtR.png

With the added suggestions the window fits much better into the rest of the eve clients layout. Especially the now left adjusted numbers are very different from all other market related windows. The current windows also wastes quite some precious space.



you know your button suggestion is already in there P

(as for your other suggestions we have to keep consistency in the client)


It's seems counter-intuitive for players figure out that they needed to click on the up/down arrow to get to the market detail window. Is it possible to return to the magnifying glass? Or do I need to just get with the times.
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#209 - 2014-11-05 18:34:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Omniblivion
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Haulers all get a large fatigue reduction bonus, so logistics should not be impacted too strongly. What ship were you trying to haul stuff around in?


Perhaps jump bridges can get another look come rhea-

-Remove fatigue on jump bridges
-Change the Jump Formula for Jump Bridges
-prevent caps from using them (i don't think it would hold enough fuel for caps anyways).

The idea behind this being that one small logistics team couldn't keep an entire network fuelled for fleets to pass through. If a fleet wanted to move a large distance to defend territory, each member of the fleet would have to carry enough fuel to jump through multiple jump bridges, which would not be likely.

This would have the effect of allowing casual use to be easy and allow jump bridges to be a major benefit to holding sov space. This would also allow faster response from defenders in the immediate area of your space. This change would prevent large fleets from being able to freely bounce from Deklein to Delve via jump bridges because of the amount of logistics that would be required to keep the jump bridges fueled. This would also save ice from the inevitable crash that is coming.

Rather than just taking the axe to jump bridges, which is basically what is happening now, you are giving the player a choice- spend more isk on fuel and carry it around with them, or take gates and save a huge amount on fuel.

(Also, I'm available for hire if you want to bring on someone with more Good Ideas to CCP Cool)

Edit: after looking at the formula, making a change instead of just a flat 3/4x increase.

Instead of: (500 * Jump distance in LY) * (ship mass / 1,000,000,000))
Change to: (250 * Jump distance in LY) * (ship mass / 10,000,000)
Change: Liquid Ozone size from .4 m3 to .1 m3

This formula could use a little more work (the ship mass piece), but this is just my napkin math version. This increases the cost to jump by a significant amount- allows ships to carry enough fuel for a few simultaneous jumps, but would prohibit fleets or groups of ships from moving more than a few jumps without some serious logistics.

I used the Ishtar as an example. One max range jump currently costs 27.75 liquid ozone (about 7k isk). The new formula would cost 1387.5 liquid ozone (roughly 347k isk) and take up 138.8 m3. An Ishtar has 560m3, so if it carried only fuel, it would be able to make a max of 4 jumps at a cost of roughly 1.39 million isk before having to refuel at a station or otherwise have some logistical support.

I am even inclined to suggest a more harsh ship mass modifier, but that leads to the problem of requiring too much m3 of fuel to be able to jump for many ships.

Edit2: The ship mass would have to be better balanced for battleships, but you get the picture. Using a raven, it couldn't carry enough fuel itself for one 5ly jump. That would be a balance call on CCP's end.
SeSca Vanger
Avanto
Hole Control
#210 - 2014-11-05 18:38:42 UTC  |  Edited by: SeSca Vanger
SeSca Vanger wrote:
Hi


A BUG (perhaps) i encountered with one of my alts.


NEW PI base links cost around 20 more CPU then before the patch TODAY (quickpatch). I know this due to making identical PI planet earlier today, with same character but falling short heavily on CPU after the patch.

IF it is not a bug, please enforce the new rule to old planets also for the whole game, thx.



**************IT Seems the bigger radius of planets make a setup take more CPU and Power. This is a BUG as the distances are identical in every planet.******************


also if one argues that the radius makes the distances longer, then it would also mean the buildings built in the planets would be 10 times bigger, this also means the cost of building the bigger radius planets should cost 10 times more.

but even so, this smells like lazy ass coding.
Erin Crawford
#211 - 2014-11-05 19:18:43 UTC
Rocky Eyebrow wrote:
Just did a desolate site and got no feedback whatsoever, No escalation, am I supposed to get some feedback now or is it just sometimes?

I also just did a Sansha Lookout and got no feedback too.


Also thanks for making things brighter, as you can see space is quite dark already. Thanks CCP for killing my eyes.
[img]http://s24.postimg.org/ky2lmfrup/2014_11_05_15_03_29.jpg[/img]

[img]http://s24.postimg.org/ujw62qj0h/2014_11_05_15_03_46.jpg[/img]

[img]http://s24.postimg.org/jycaqqcox/2014_11_05_15_04_18.jpg[/img]


Agreed. It's the only issue I have - it seems that the previously bright areas, which were perfectly fine, have now been brightened even more due to the darker areas of the nebula being brightened - a compounding effect that may be a bit too much.

The darkest areas(shadow areas) needed brightening, but the brightest were fine.

It's a bit retina-burning at times.
Shocked

"Those who talk don’t know. Those who know don’t talk. "

Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#212 - 2014-11-05 19:41:24 UTC
Seraph Essael wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
Seraph Essael wrote:
Can we please have a shortcut for Directional Scan back? If there is one, I haven't found it... Alt + D no longer works...

Set your own. It's not hard.

I tried that, tried setting it to Shift + D but I can't get it to work... Sad

Are you sure that's not already a keybind for something else? If it is you'll have to clear it.

Alt + D should, as of Phoebe, be the keybind for the probe scanner. I don't know why they chose to do it that way, but they did. I cleared that keybind, set Alt + D for dscan, and set Alt + P for probe scanner.
Jackson Apollo
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#213 - 2014-11-05 19:49:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Jackson Apollo
Feedback:

If its not crazy hard to code can we get a "remember sell price for this item" checkbox? (Client side better?)

Its not as good as if i could multisell the same thing in multistations but it would help me (and I assume at least the shuttle scam folks).

Mainly with not accidentally selling to the daggum 0.01 isk buy orders because I didnt CTRL-A, CTRL+V hard enough and my stupid finger hit enter. (On order 216 of the day)

Secondly I currently have to open corp asset delivery's, right click -> deliver to member -> double click myself -> repeat 40 times in some regions -> then open personal assets in region -> right click sell one item-> ctrl-a -> ctrl-v -> sell -> repeat until I've set sell orders for all the things.

If it at least let me save prices I could change my process a bit and save a lot of frustration and a few seconds of time.

*hugs and promises of peanut-butter cookies*

I'll never ask for anything else again.
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#214 - 2014-11-05 19:52:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Primary This Rifter
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
So you should probably do something about capital ships bumping each other when they're coming out of warp onto gates, or coming out of gate cloak.


There's really no good solution for an arbitrarily large number of titans trying to use a gate that doesn't end up getting pretty silly. We're currently operating on the assumption that player groups who can deploy large number of capitals have the skill and EVE knowledge to figure out how to mitigate these issues themselves.

Nothing we can really do to avoid bumping out of gate cloak, or bumping on landing at a gate.

You want capitals to take gates, so it's your responsibility to make sure we can actually do that without bouncing all over the ******* place and making it more awful than it already is.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#215 - 2014-11-05 20:06:54 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
So you should probably do something about capital ships bumping each other when they're coming out of warp onto gates, or coming out of gate cloak.


There's really no good solution for an arbitrarily large number of titans trying to use a gate that doesn't end up getting pretty silly. We're currently operating on the assumption that player groups who can deploy large number of capitals have the skill and EVE knowledge to figure out how to mitigate these issues themselves.

Nothing we can really do to avoid bumping out of gate cloak, or bumping on landing at a gate.

You want capitals to take gates, so it's your responsibility to make sure we can actually do that without bouncing all over the ******* place and making it more awful than it already is.


Yes there is.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#216 - 2014-11-05 20:13:28 UTC
William Ruben wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

I don't believe this is an intended feature of Phoebe. If they're still missing after a relog, I'd suggest filing a petition.

Thanks for the reply. It might be an API issue with EVEMon; I'm on the road at present but will check when I get home.


Oh, right. Yeah, that's probably broken, we changed the implant API format so everything that's not been updated won't read implants properly. I thought you meant they were actually missing ingame, rather than in a 3rd party app :)
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#217 - 2014-11-05 20:36:03 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
So you should probably do something about capital ships bumping each other when they're coming out of warp onto gates, or coming out of gate cloak.


There's really no good solution for an arbitrarily large number of titans trying to use a gate that doesn't end up getting pretty silly. We're currently operating on the assumption that player groups who can deploy large number of capitals have the skill and EVE knowledge to figure out how to mitigate these issues themselves.

Nothing we can really do to avoid bumping out of gate cloak, or bumping on landing at a gate.

You want capitals to take gates, so it's your responsibility to make sure we can actually do that without bouncing all over the ******* place and making it more awful than it already is.


Yes there is.

I must say, "well, we know it sucks, but we expect our players to muddle through anyway" is the sort of design decision that leads people to think ccp is deliberately sadistic at times :v:
Sergej Petrow
I-F-L Minus
#218 - 2014-11-05 20:47:41 UTC
Greetings,


first: my english isn't good. I hope you understand my text.

Now a green marker on the mainscreen tells me the Mission success.

It's a great new Feature.

But there is a mistake.
If I need a questitem and I get it with a MTU, it is reported no success.

It also does not work when I bring the item matter of the MTU in the inventory .

When I go into mission-detail , the success is displayed correctly .
Vila eNorvic
#219 - 2014-11-05 20:51:11 UTC
Vila eNorvic wrote:
I've lost all +3's on one character but still have them on the other two (all on same account).

Petition filed.

CCP Greyscale wrote:
William Ruben wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

I don't believe this is an intended feature of Phoebe. If they're still missing after a relog, I'd suggest filing a petition.

Thanks for the reply. It might be an API issue with EVEMon; I'm on the road at present but will check when I get home.


Oh, right. Yeah, that's probably broken, we changed the implant API format so everything that's not been updated won't read implants properly. I thought you meant they were actually missing ingame, rather than in a 3rd party app :)

Just to clarify, mine are missing in game.
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#220 - 2014-11-05 20:53:07 UTC
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
I must say, "well, we know it sucks, but we expect our players to muddle through anyway" is the sort of design decision that leads people to think ccp is deliberately sadistic at times :v:

It's more like "we're not going to fix the problems that we created with this patch, deal with it."