EVE General Discussion

For me, that was a total of four windows in the old system, and they occupided about ⅕ of the screen in a neat row along the bottom.

You could replicate almost exactly what we have now with the old system. It is impossible to replicate what you could do with the old system using the new one.

No. People are quite willing to change if the change is for the better. In this case, the change is towards decreased functionality and lower efficiency. It's not a resistance to change — it's a resistance to deterioration. It's interesting that you bring up the CQ since it was indeed the same thing, but you're paining it in the wrong light. People didn't complain because it changed — they complained because it made things worse, because they lost functionality, because they lost efficiency, and because the new system offered nothing to improve on those two things.

Making an “old/new” toggle is also the exact wrong way to go. What they should have done was to ensure that the new system offers the same functionality as the old one, and then add more, new functionality on top of that. They couldn't do that with the CQ because they were two completely different systems and because the CQ in and if itself didn't actually offer any functionality at all.

…at which point I only have to ask how you did it before, since you could — quite literally — have exactly the same setup in the old system as the new one offers (and the entire problem is that the opposite isn't true).

I will readily grant you that the old system wasn't intuitive and that I did indeed spend a lot of time setting my inventory UI up to work exactly the way I wanted it, but the point is that it could be done; I could have a setup that blew this new UI out of the water (and contrary to many reports, I feel the new UI is more responsive than the old one, so it's not that issue either for me). So sure, some might feel like it's an improvement because they never figured out how to do this with the old UI and the new one does it automatically for them, but for some of us, this automation comes at the loss of control — the thing that previously let us choose whether we wanted something similar to this new single-window interface or whether we wanted some other kind of setup.

I suppose. The feedback threads always came back to the comparison with Explorer vs. Total Commander. The new UI offers an explorer-like interface that many are probably used to (including the fugly copy-paste hack for file manipulation)… but I never used explorer because it was a slow and featureless piece of fæces. My old setup was very TC-like: always (at least) two main windows — one for observation and comparison; one for manipulation.

The new one doesn't offer that because it lacks the core multi-window functionality to support it. You can open two windows, yes, but it's still a main window and a secondary slave window, not two windows that act as equals (and god forbid that you try to use more than that…).

But that's just it: is really is. For someone who wants the kind of efficiency that the old system offered when set up well, the new one is slow and cumbersome to the point of breaking the game.

It's not just a matter of customisation either, but of a fundamental lack of functionality: the new system doesn't actually support multiple windows. It's still very clearly a single-window UI that you just so happen to be able to run multiple copies of, but that multi-window functionality is just a half-assed add-on hack that doesn't actually offer the functionality of multiple windows — only the windows themselves.

The new UI is an excellent replacement for the old tabbed interface that you had with hangars and (commonly) containers and cans; it is not a replacement for using multiple locations at once… in fact, it replaces that with nothing.

You'll have to measure that against a scale that includes the fact that they've once again quite clearly ignored a whole heap of feedback, though. It happens over and over again, and the rage will keep rising every time it does. It doesn't help that the devs have a tendency to be very flippant towards even well-reasoned responses until someone verbally punches them in the mouth and call them morons. It's a culture they've bred themselves and I have no empathy for their crocodile tears at this point.

One thing that bothered me is that it wants to act as my cargo hold. I mostly use my cargo hold as a informer of how much ammo cap and charges I've left. To have to open the inventory, shift-click my ships inventory and then try to make it as small as its predecessor is quite bothersome. To this i got a idea of a solution that might help a bit, since I actually think that the new inventory is over all good.

The idea:
Implement a "hide" feature for the right-side-navigation-tree in the inventory, a << button on the divider.
Make the ship cargo button and the alt+c hotkey open a separate window of the inventory and make it remember if you had the navigation tree hidden or not in that session. Making it so that if you had it hidden when you closed it the next time you open your cargo hold it'll remember it and be hidden from start. The POS guy would probably appreciate if you did this for their POSes and containers too.
This would make it possible to have the small cargo hold window back and detach it from the big mega hulk that is the inventory.

Lastly give back the right-click options for opening stuff. Some people see it as an achievement to be able to open a container five different ways others just thinks it handy.

My 5 isk

when playing with the new inventory on sisi i really loved it. after taking 10 minutes to get used to it it worked great. some things worked different then i wanted (double click for cargo please?) but i can live with it

the problem is the horrible lag and the lack of filtering. on sisi there are no pos's unless you set one up. now that its on TQ i realise the horror of the new inventory. it still has all the good things i found on sisi but there are some dreadfull things

our current pos has 7 sma's, 3 assembly arrays and some 50 guns. not to mention the carriers and orca's usually piloted around the pos. the lag is horrible. you cant quickly get ammo, switch a ship or do anything even remotely usefull. and when things finally get loaded the list of guns goes on and on, making it impossible to quickly find what youre looking for. and if you finally find it, its out of range. if there was an auto approach on those "containers" and it would show what was in it regardless of range this wasnt much of a problem, but it doesnt.

basically, it made pos life hell.

its crap change it back is what i think.

Quick update to the inventory stuff:

We created a list of changes we'd like to make yesterday. Today we're going through it and planning when to do what. I'll post it up later today so you guys can see the changes.

One of the changes I'm mulling over two different options and I'd really like your feedback on it. Specifically, it's the POSs showing all the inventories you can interact with:

Solution one: All POS inventories are treated as wrecks. You fly to them, open them and they're put in your inventory with a little "x" next to them so you can remove them once you've used them.

Solution two: All POS inventories are put in to trees, so you can open/close whatever subsection of inventories you're currently interacting with.

Anyway, feel free to add some feedback to those two and I'll return with a more detailed list of changes later today.

I started out by hating.. I hated it so much.. I did some tests to see if it was just like on Sisi.. found it was and decided to log off and do something else.

Then in the evening, I started wrapping my head around it, setting it up the way I wanted, learned that it does wtf it wants when I dock/undock/jump, learned to tame it a little bit more and now I kind of like it :|

There is one thing.. one thing only... Allow us to move stuff from one can to another when you have them opened in the same window (with tabs) by dragging stuff onto the tabs and I be happy again.

Who cares, you wont be around for them, you quit remember? You quit all of your accounts and then asked others to do the same.

By the way CCP Soundwave, solution 1 sounds nice and the easiest to implement and to use.

Pre inferno any time I played I could reasonably expect to need any combination of the following open in sperate windows, sometimes I would stack the windows for space efficiency. It wasn't perfect but it worked well.

- Ship Cargo Bay (I use a orcas and carriers a lot so up to 3 of these, 4 if you include its ship hanger)
- Cargo bay of other ship
- Multiple corp hangers (and their tabs)
- one or more Jetcans
- Secure cans in cargo
- Ship maintenance bay
- Drone bay
- Silos
- Laboratorys
- Assembly arrays

Post inferno I still use all the same hangers and I still need to have them in seperate windows, but now it takes more time and effort for each one. It isn't perfect and it doesn't work well.

The new inv system kind of works for ships with multiple cargo bays, having them appear as sub menus in the tree can make accessing them a little easier. The same is true for dealing with single CHA's/Assembly arrays, though that's less of an improvement and more a different way of displaying them since they had dedicated hanger section tabs anyway, which tbh I prefered.


So, it gives me a little extra feature for my multi hanger ships, which while not necessery is kindah nice. On the other hand it gets in the way of just about everything I do as far as moving ships/cargo is concerned. With the exception of looting. As long as I use the loot all function (which I do most of the time).


Yeah not a good change, CCP Goliath compared it to windows 95 vs Windows 8 (98?), I've found a better comparrison to be Windows XP vs Windows Vista.

Collapsible trees would be just fine, ideally you'd also be able to rearrange them and this order is preserved in memory.