These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Proteus features on Singularity

First post
Author
CCP Habakuk
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2015-01-02 12:33:33 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Goliath
Hi,

Singularity is now updated to include features for the Proteus release. This thread is for general feedback, but please use feature-specific threads if possible.

A mass test is being scheduled for next week, probably for Tuesday 17:00 EVE-time. More information will follow later.

Known issues:
None so far

Features:
Most teams are still on vacation and I am not sure which features are ready and which are work in progress. We will add to the list over the next few days. For an overview about the features in Proteus please have a look at this devblog by CCP Seagull.

Team TriLamda:
New atmospheric environment effects for asteroid belts

Team Five 0:
New Player Mining Anomaly

CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five 0 | (Team Gridlock)

Bug reporting | Mass Testing

Ms Grape Drink
Doomheim
#2 - 2015-01-02 23:47:16 UTC
The cost of the ORE Expanded Cargoholds and Bulkheads are way too high.

Even at a competitive 5k ISK/LP (Only one station that has level 4's, only in null, items never drop anywhere else) they end up at:

Expanded Cargohold - (67,500 * 5,000) + 45,000,000 = 382,500,000
Reinforced Bulkheads - (45,000 * 5,000) + 30,000,000 = 255,000,000 (not as bad but still so high)

I would have imagined they would be close to something that has a similar role such as a faction gyrostabilzer for combat ships (30,000 LP) with the tag requirements being built into the high base isk values...like they already are.


This would put them at a much more reasonable:

Expanded Cargohold - (30,000 * 5000) + 45,000,000 = 195,000,000
Reinforced Bulkheads - (30,000 * 5000) + 30,000,000 = 180,000,000

I was hoping these would be a good lower income higher volume type of thing for selling along with higher income lower volume stuff such as the implants, which can swing much more than a competitive 5k ISK/LP

These are some cool now additions for people with some extra monies, but if they are kept as high as they currently are, they will be used about as much as the ORE Miner (nice M3 buff by the way, but still too much LP), which is very very rarely. Implants will sell almost as fast for much more and they wont be the cool new exciting things you all had hoped for :(
Tash'k Omar
Indefinite Mass
Odin's Call
#3 - 2015-01-03 14:25:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Tash'k Omar
Ms Grape Drink wrote:
The cost of the ORE Expanded Cargoholds and Bulkheads are way too high.

Even at a competitive 5k ISK/LP (Only one station that has level 4's, only in null, items never drop anywhere else) they end up at:

Expanded Cargohold - (67,500 * 5,000) + 45,000,000 = 382,500,000
Reinforced Bulkheads - (45,000 * 5,000) + 30,000,000 = 255,000,000 (not as bad but still so high)

I would have imagined they would be close to something that has a similar role such as a faction gyrostabilzer for combat ships (30,000 LP) with the tag requirements being built into the high base isk values...like they already are.


This would put them at a much more reasonable:

Expanded Cargohold - (30,000 * 5000) + 45,000,000 = 195,000,000
Reinforced Bulkheads - (30,000 * 5000) + 30,000,000 = 180,000,000

I was hoping these would be a good lower income higher volume type of thing for selling along with higher income lower volume stuff such as the implants, which can swing much more than a competitive 5k ISK/LP

These are some cool now additions for people with some extra monies, but if they are kept as high as they currently are, they will be used about as much as the ORE Miner (nice M3 buff by the way, but still too much LP), which is very very rarely. Implants will sell almost as fast for much more and they wont be the cool new exciting things you all had hoped for :(


No you got it wrong, you're supposed to say first.

I am excited to try out the new features coming in Proteus! Will provide updates here with any issues I find.

-- Edit: Recon changes do not appear to have made it in yet :(
Vesan Terakol
Trollgrin Sadface
Dark Taboo
#4 - 2015-01-03 15:34:13 UTC
Hello! About the new Execuror model:

I'm not sure why - model definition or texture layout but something makes it look as if it has a lot lower definition than everything else that has come out recently as new models.

I'd love if you make another pass on the texture before releasing it - it kind of looks less impressive than the old model.
Ms Grape Drink
Doomheim
#5 - 2015-01-03 16:50:11 UTC
Tash'k Omar wrote:
Ms Grape Drink wrote:
The cost of the ORE Expanded Cargoholds and Bulkheads are way too high.

Even at a competitive 5k ISK/LP (Only one station that has level 4's, only in null, items never drop anywhere else) they end up at:

Expanded Cargohold - (67,500 * 5,000) + 45,000,000 = 382,500,000
Reinforced Bulkheads - (45,000 * 5,000) + 30,000,000 = 255,000,000 (not as bad but still so high)

I would have imagined they would be close to something that has a similar role such as a faction gyrostabilzer for combat ships (30,000 LP) with the tag requirements being built into the high base isk values...like they already are.


This would put them at a much more reasonable:

Expanded Cargohold - (30,000 * 5000) + 45,000,000 = 195,000,000
Reinforced Bulkheads - (30,000 * 5000) + 30,000,000 = 180,000,000

I was hoping these would be a good lower income higher volume type of thing for selling along with higher income lower volume stuff such as the implants, which can swing much more than a competitive 5k ISK/LP

These are some cool now additions for people with some extra monies, but if they are kept as high as they currently are, they will be used about as much as the ORE Miner (nice M3 buff by the way, but still too much LP), which is very very rarely. Implants will sell almost as fast for much more and they wont be the cool new exciting things you all had hoped for :(


No you got it wrong, you're supposed to say first.

I am excited to try out the new features coming in Proteus! Will provide updates here with any issues I find.

-- Edit: Recon changes do not appear to have made it in yet :(


I was going to, but I typed so much I figured Id get beaten to the punch line, guess I was wrong :(
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#6 - 2015-01-04 00:37:41 UTC
Vesan Terakol wrote:
Hello! About the new Execuror model:

I'm not sure why - model definition or texture layout but something makes it look as if it has a lot lower definition than everything else that has come out recently as new models.

I'd love if you make another pass on the texture before releasing it - it kind of looks less impressive than the old model.


Shaders have to be on High to get the full texture, on Medium it looks like shiny aluminum.
Sir Livingston
Doomheim
#7 - 2015-01-04 00:48:27 UTC
Thanks for keeping us updated on Proteus o7

Sci-fi games as played by an earthbound human in the 21st century http://www.youtube.com/JonnyPew

Dangeresque Too
Pistols for Pandas
#8 - 2015-01-04 00:57:58 UTC
The light rays look awesome, but the asteroid sprite blob looks terribad, esp from a distance, just a blob of dots.

Also found out that when I turned off the asteroid sprite blob, the light rays went with them even though it was still turned on.

So for anyone testing this, in order to see the light rays you need to also have asteroid sprite blob turned on... but if you just want to see the asteroid sprite blob, you only need to select asteroid sprite blob and can leave light rays unselected.

But overall, the asteroid sprite blob either needs toned down or re-worked to look like not a blob of sprites.
Ms Grape Drink
Doomheim
#9 - 2015-01-06 18:27:05 UTC
Guess there's going to be no discussion on the LP costs, eh?

Oh well, RIP new mods :D
Yahrr
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#10 - 2015-01-07 02:58:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Yahrr
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
Vesan Terakol wrote:
Hello! About the new Execuror model:

I'm not sure why - model definition or texture layout but something makes it look as if it has a lot lower definition than everything else that has come out recently as new models.

I'd love if you make another pass on the texture before releasing it - it kind of looks less impressive than the old model.


Shaders have to be on High to get the full texture, on Medium it looks like shiny aluminum.

With everything on High it still looks flat. Maybe it's DX9 vs DX11, but I doubt it. Compared to other new Gallente models it looks like the bumpmap is just too light.

The Navy Exequror really disappointed me. Maybe I was just expecting too much after seeing awesome models like the new bombers, the Scorp and the Moa...
- A flat green camo, with a way too obvious mirror line and a bump map so light you'd almost have to screenshot it to photoshop to make it visible. The black parts look like plastic.
- They added two radar discs to the sides of the ship. I wonder why. With the new way of designing ships, where they clearly mark things as dronebay, cargobay, warp engines, etcetera I'm sure they have a reason for them. It's not for the RR, otherwise the Navy wouldn't have them. On a vehicle that is most likely to get shot with shrapnel at a daily basis, delicate equipment would be behind a layer of armor, not in front of it.
- The engines are square. Ok, I'm exaggerating here, they are 8-sided. That's a hell of a lot of polygons for a 2015 game. Maybe reduce it to four sides to remove the idea that the engines are supposed to be cylindrical in shape. Saving polygons is necessary to keep games running smooth, but saving them on curved outlines of the model is a bad idea. Add detail where the model contrasts to the background and save polys in the middle by replacing them with bump and displacement maps. The same goes for those radar discs, I mean -octagons.
- The main engines don't have trails. I guess this is because they have four flames each and four trails per main engine becomes a bit much, but the way it is now it looks incomplete.
- The gun placement is a bit funky as when the ship is aligned to the target, the guns fire through each other. In most, if not all, old models the guns are placed in such a way that before this would happen the other side of the ship would have a better position. Heck, the old Exequror even has gunpoints that add three visual guns just to avoid this.

The Oneiros was supposed to get T2 additions to the model, like the T2 versions of the Moa or the old Incursus models. The additions were displayed on the preview picture, including a clear marking about the imagined function.

I do like the opening/closing drone bays. The moving warp engines are nice as well, though I'm wondering why a spaceship builder would make them moveable. They also seem kinda flimsy for very important and super powerful warp engines.

---

The asteroid belts are beautiful! The fog, the grit, the light rays... The large chunks of debris might be a bit too large. They're just camera facing sprites, so it's not interacting with the ship, but some where about the same size as the Exequror's cockpit. I'm sure that hurts with 4km/s. Lol My prehistoric HD4890 had no problem rendering it (without anti-aliasing or HDR).

I like how CCP is trying to give the game a more realistic feel, but even with the new lighting and awesomnifying asteroid fields, the whole immersion breaks apart every time my ship goes in warp and does a hard, full stop right before it jumps into warp. Maybe this explains why the windshields don't break with all the cruiser sized rocks in the belts. They're made to keep the ship's furniture inside when it does this trick.

---

For the recons I just want to point to that 108 pages monster topic. Straight
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
#11 - 2015-01-08 17:48:40 UTC
Tericide changes are in
Improved new map for own data shows( mouse over requires selecting and refocus not just mouse over).
No directional scanner, scanning or independent system view yet.

Recon ship changes are in also.

Patch notes and site not update yet.

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

See you around the universe.

Dangeresque Too
Pistols for Pandas
#12 - 2015-01-11 23:56:15 UTC
I saw there was another patch to sisi today, so I decided to check to see if anything has been fixed with the new asteroid belt effects.

1) Asteroid debris sprite blob:

http://imgur.com/DjuHoeO

http://imgur.com/GUg4M2v

Nope, still looks like an awful blob of duplicated sprites. Does not make belts feel more real or look neater, at all. I've seen better more realistic sprite blobs in older games. And yes, I have my graphics all the way up.

2) Light Rays:

In order to be able to see the light rays, you also have to have the Asteroid Sprite Blob enabled as well. Why advertise these as 2 separate features if one requires the other? I don't see why we shouldn't be able to see the light rays if we don't want to see the sprite blob. I mean they don't have sprite blobs in Incursion systems yet we get to see the light rays, should be no different here.

Please separate these 2 features. If you don't believe me go and turn off the asteroid sprite blob but leave light rays on, you will not see the light rays. Unless this is a bug and they are supposed to be visible on their own without the sprite blob?
Malou Hashur
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#13 - 2015-01-12 08:29:31 UTC
I posted a comment / question in the thread you recommended: “New atmospheric environment effects for asteroid belts”, but it was completely ignored, as was the whole thread after the first day. Awesome stuff.

Therefore I will repost it here so that it can be ignored in this thread also:


I mine on my laptop, and I really do not need the FPS to be lower than it is now. However, If you turn off the new asteroid effects, it makes no difference unless you also turn the shader level to low, which makes everything else look like sh!t.

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.