These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#221 - 2012-07-24 22:34:43 UTC
^ Tell him goon, this isn't sandbox, just do what you are told, then the game makes sense and you will enjoy it.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#222 - 2012-07-24 22:35:50 UTC
CCP Explorer wrote:
KIller Wabbit wrote:
Thanks for filling in the rest of the story, Punkturis. Maybe the rest of the Dev's will get a clue about proactively engaging with us instead of ignoring us and hoping for the best (which rarely has happened over the past two years).
Most devs at CCP read the forums very actively and diligently, and incorporate the feedback in their work. But some are not responding as actively on the forums (or on Twitter) because they are not willing to endure at times the kind of beating CCP Punkturis has been subject to here.

Sorry, Explorer, but this doesn't wash. It is not ok for devs to "incorporate the feedback in their work", while remaining stoic and silent on the forums.

If the devs are going to publish devblogs and create forum threads for player feedback, then they need to participate in the discussions. At the very least, they need to acknowledge that they are actively reading the posts, spawned by their devblog or thread. As I suggested to CCP Soniclover in one thread, it doesn't take much time to post a simple ack message once a week or so:

"Interesting idea - we'll take a look at it. No promises, though."

"Yes, I'm still following the discussion, even if I'm too busy coding to write a long response right now."

"Yeah, that probably was a bad idea - we'll fix it."

"We're committed to going ahead as planned, but if it really doesn't work out as expected on TQ, we'll fix it."

Sure, players will always want more info and more detail, but, these simple acks confirm to the players that their suggestions are actually being read (and perhaps responded to), which goes a long way towards proactively defusing player rage.

Ofc, more info and more detail is always appreciated. :)

CCP Punkturis may indeed be subject to forum beatings, at times, but it is also pretty clear that she is considered to be one of the more respected devs by the players. Changes to the UI (user interface) is a very touchy subject, for any game, and Punkturis' interaction with the players on the forums has done much to mitigate player anger and frustration.

CCP Sreegs' method of player interaction may tend more towards a kick in the balls (lol), but he also garners respect due to his willingness to respond to players on some very difficult issues.

So, kudos to both of them (and the few other devs who are active on the forums). Hopefully, CCP will indeed encourage the more reticent devs to follow their example, which can only make things better for both the devs and the players.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#223 - 2012-07-24 22:41:39 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
CCP Affinity wrote:
Rommiee wrote:


Sadly, yes she did say that.

It pretty much sums up CCP's attitude lately.




Just to clear this up for the last time as you obviously didn't read the entire thread - CCP Punkturis was talking about the UI as in USER INTERFACE on EVE TV .. not the unified inventory. Also, reading this thread (note not just the post above, but the entire thread) has made me really sad, no one deserves to be spoken to like this.


Affinity. I agree completely.

But I have to admit to understanding why people are being butthurt about this. Hek, I am still a bit butthurt about the Unified Inventory. I know better than to think that beating up Punkturis, a dev who was not on the project and is currently on a well deserved vacation, about a quote taken out of context is going to do any good though.

On the other side of the story, Inventory was released broken. Not rolled back and promises were made about weekly releases until "we were happy with it", even making the point that "we" meant CCP AND the playerbase. But communication and fixes have dropped off after some really good progress and "we", by and large, are still not happy with it (and I am not just talking about the crowd that will accept nothing short of a rollback). I think its gotten 80-90% there. I fully understand that we angry users have been a pain to deal with, and for my part offer apologies, but this still needs fixing.

People are mad about it and have some good reasons for being so. Hopefully with ATX (which I got totally sucked into and enjoyed thoroughly, thanks all!) out of the way, some people on that team or otherwise able to address the issue will be able to speak on coming fixes and plans. Which should help alleviate the feelings of helpless frustration and abandonment many feel when cursing the inventory UI on a daily basis.


Yeah CCP hasn't been communicationg too much on it. Most devs who are part of a project help do the dev blog on it and answer questions on it. I havn't seen that dev too much, during this (maybe he showed up, who knows). Maybe part of the reason she got attacked. Her teammate was on vacation, so she got all the anger. Plus she does come across as being "big" with the UI and stuff, which would make her a prime target. ( We only knew to attack hilmar for incarna, because of the leaked emails and other secret stuff) otherwise we would have attacked other devs for it.

The new inventory is pretty bad, its fun though, once I treat it like a bugged program. Luckily I don't have a pos up right now, or have strong reason to use the inventory more.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#224 - 2012-07-24 23:00:00 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:

Check our Inferno 1.2 feature page for more information!

This page is merely decorative and rather uninformative, for both old players and new players.

For old players, it does not provide any details, whatsoever.

For new players, it just doesn't make much sense, since the information provided assumes that you already understand the context.

It would probably work better if these static image pages were replaced with the video dev blogs, and links to the relevant dev blog pages or forum threads.
Paul Miromme
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#225 - 2012-07-24 23:00:53 UTC
I may be trolling myself with this one but in regards of Camo on space ships.
Whilst it can look cool this method would have made more sense as it breaks up
the shape http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage
Zifrian
The Frog Pond
Ribbit.
#226 - 2012-07-24 23:25:09 UTC
Please up the ore hold on the Hulk to 8000m3 to match the current cargohold capacity please. I can almost fill my cargo in one cycle and I'd rather not have to split ore up between the cargo and the ore hold.

Also, can you please update the Survey Scanner range to 30km? This is such a simple change that would make a world of difference. Thanks!

Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!

Import CCP's SDE - EVE SDE Database Builder
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#227 - 2012-07-24 23:44:35 UTC
When will the big changes come that will shake this game?

I wish you would change the mining mechanics so that it's actually a fun thing to do. Faction warfare sounds like a great experience but it still mean nothing - why can't we help the for different factions take space?

I feel like i've been waiting for something great to happen in eve for a long time now but all i'm seeing coming from CCP is polish.

Yeah i know, this is a sandbox and i make my own fun, right?

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Inspiration
#228 - 2012-07-24 23:45:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Inspiration
Vincent Athena wrote:
*] Hulk
  • armorHP: 1013.0 => 2300.0
  • capacity: 8000.0 => 500.0
  • eliteBonusBarge2: -3.0 => -4.0
  • hp: 2531.0 => 2500.0
  • shieldCapacity: 1519.0 => 2700.0
  • shieldRechargeRate: 625000.0 => 1000000.0
    • [+] specialOreHoldCapacity: 7500.0

    Same yield as the current hulk, and 77% more shields.

    I tank my hulk to 23.3K EHP. With these modes it will be pushing 36k. Before fleet boost.


    Max mining yield fit (the reason to go for the hulk over other exhumers) it looses almost 2% yield versus what it is currently. You do get extra HP (not a real lot), but have to sacrifice crystals storage and ore storage space both.
    It will not be a very nice ship to handle.

    To compare it to the new mackinaw and skiff. The hulk mines 15.5% more then a Mackinaw, but when you see what the trade off is, you will feel sick. The mackinaw has 37.5k ore hold (yes you read that right) and more hitpoints. Compared to the skiff, the hulk mines about 26% more, and a bit better when counting drones (skiff has only 15m3 drone bandwidth). The tank of the skiff however easily outranks both Mackinaw and Hulk and still has 17.5k m3 ore bay (10k more then the hulk).

    It is kind of pointless to tank the hulk to the hills, all you get is lower yield then the other ships, a weaker tank and a much smaller ore bay. In your case I would go for the Skiff, since tank is your main concern and the Skiff is still in the same ballpark as you are used to mine.

    Also, you can carry 10 crystals on the hulk in your cargo hold, but in order to be able to switch, you need to make 50m3 free. The true cargo hold not counting trickery is 450m3 (9 T2 crystals). The mackinaw is proportionally smaller and the skiff is the one to go for with half the Mackinaw turrets and same cargo hold size.

    In my opinion, the hulk has been nerfed into a barely useful ship. Even for use in its primary role as that of best miner!

    In almost all situations the mackinaw is the much better ship now. That 15.5% mining loss can be partially compensated by with implants and a drone rig. The hulk really needs 2.5k more for a total of 10k ore hold to be still in the game for me. I sure am liking the Mackinaw more now over a hulk, given how things stand. Small errors in mining will undo that 15.5% theoretical benefit pretty quick and being able to watch a movie will be good.

    I haven't looked at the ice numbers, but expect the numbers to scale similar. Mackinaw remains king there with such a large or hold...the bots will tank CCP once more! It is like it was made with them in mind!

    I am serious!

    Sizeof Void
    Ninja Suicide Squadron
    #229 - 2012-07-25 00:13:45 UTC
    Please add the ability to fit a Covert Ops Cloaking Device II and the ability to mine while cloaked to both the Hulk and Mackinaw.

    Just kidding. :)
    mkint
    #230 - 2012-07-25 00:20:47 UTC
    CCP Explorer wrote:
    To follow up on CCP Affinity's post; releasing features as optional is something that we have a technical framework for, but: It's not possible in all cases and we can't do it for all features even when it's possible. In some cases it may not be possible to have the new and the old systems live side-by-side. We would have to maintain full backwards compatibility in the underlying frameworks to support the old systems and that might not always be possible or hamper the development of the new systems. We would not consider to do it for all features where it would be possible, for the reasons CCP Affinity mentioned above: Large code-dependencies and maintenance burden.

    In general, we would possibly consider this when releasing new features but in general not when re-factoring older systems.


    I for one totally get that optional features is a p.i.t.a. However, with features that fundamentally change the user experience, howsabout they at least get polished to the point where they don't suck? Inventory changes are not the first time CCP released a feature half-assed and broken. With how much devs complain about getting yelled at by the players, you'd think some of them would start saying "hey... this feature sucks... let's finish it before deploying it." Inventory wasn't broken to begin with. The team working on it could have worked on it for another year while releasing nothing, and the players wouldn't have noticed. And then when it was released it would have likely been awesome. Well, except for the part where CCP devs just don't seem to understand the point of UI, but that's another pet peeve.

    (also, a dev pointed out in another thread that the motivation for the inventory revamp was one of the main complaints of EVE being too many windows... I think it's hilarious that to fix that they simply broke inventory instead of, you know, making windows easier to navigate like they were 4 years ago, that I'm still bitter about.)

    Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
    TheSmokingHertog
    Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
    #231 - 2012-07-25 00:32:15 UTC
    Lets add a link for everyone who did read this far;

    "CCP Fozzie" commented on reaction changes for TECH in the MD forums, I thought that non-MD reading people would apriciate the link.

    "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 =-
    Richard Desturned
    Royal Amarr Institute
    Amarr Empire
    #232 - 2012-07-25 00:32:21 UTC
    rodyas wrote:
    ^ Tell him goon, this isn't sandbox, just do what you are told, then the game makes sense and you will enjoy it.


    sandbox doesn't mean "the devs mold the game into whatever you desire" hope this helps

    npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
    Bubanni
    Center for Advanced Studies
    Gallente Federation
    #233 - 2012-07-25 00:32:44 UTC
    Sizeof Void wrote:
    CCP Explorer wrote:
    KIller Wabbit wrote:
    Thanks for filling in the rest of the story, Punkturis. Maybe the rest of the Dev's will get a clue about proactively engaging with us instead of ignoring us and hoping for the best (which rarely has happened over the past two years).
    Most devs at CCP read the forums very actively and diligently, and incorporate the feedback in their work. But some are not responding as actively on the forums (or on Twitter) because they are not willing to endure at times the kind of beating CCP Punkturis has been subject to here.

    Sorry, Explorer, but this doesn't wash. It is not ok for devs to "incorporate the feedback in their work", while remaining stoic and silent on the forums.

    If the devs are going to publish devblogs and create forum threads for player feedback, then they need to participate in the discussions. At the very least, they need to acknowledge that they are actively reading the posts, spawned by their devblog or thread. As I suggested to CCP Soniclover in one thread, it doesn't take much time to post a simple ack message once a week or so:

    "Interesting idea - we'll take a look at it. No promises, though."

    "Yes, I'm still following the discussion, even if I'm too busy coding to write a long response right now."

    "Yeah, that probably was a bad idea - we'll fix it."

    "We're committed to going ahead as planned, but if it really doesn't work out as expected on TQ, we'll fix it."

    Sure, players will always want more info and more detail, but, these simple acks confirm to the players that their suggestions are actually being read (and perhaps responded to), which goes a long way towards proactively defusing player rage.

    Ofc, more info and more detail is always appreciated. :)

    CCP Punkturis may indeed be subject to forum beatings, at times, but it is also pretty clear that she is considered to be one of the more respected devs by the players. Changes to the UI (user interface) is a very touchy subject, for any game, and Punkturis' interaction with the players on the forums has done much to mitigate player anger and frustration.

    CCP Sreegs' method of player interaction may tend more towards a kick in the balls (lol), but he also garners respect due to his willingness to respond to players on some very difficult issues.

    So, kudos to both of them (and the few other devs who are active on the forums). Hopefully, CCP will indeed encourage the more reticent devs to follow their example, which can only make things better for both the devs and the players.


    I was kicked in my calls by Sreegs :3 verbally ofc when I was asking questions related to hydra... he still earns my respect for being awesome wub wub wub hi5 o/

    Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934
    Hustomte
    Veritex Industrial Inc.
    #234 - 2012-07-25 00:36:52 UTC
    Ok you Unified Inventory Numbskulls LISTEN UP!

    1) READ THIS DEV BLOG:
    http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=72868

    2) Understand the words:"less frequent release schedule" and the word "vacations".

    3) Slap yourself for being an idiot.

    Now sit back and enjoy Inferno 1.2, wait for Dev's to get back from holiday, and save your tears for the Winter Expansion.

    Are we clear on this blockheads?

    ...Signature...
    Bubanni
    Center for Advanced Studies
    Gallente Federation
    #235 - 2012-07-25 00:47:04 UTC
    Hustomte wrote:
    Ok you Unified Inventory Numbskulls LISTEN UP!

    1) READ THIS DEV BLOG:
    http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=72868

    2) Understand the words:"less frequent release schedule" and the word "vacations".

    3) Slap yourself for being an idiot.

    Now sit back and enjoy Inferno 1.2, wait for Dev's to get back from holiday, and save your tears for the Winter Expansion.

    Are we clear on this blockheads?


    No :3 because devs who release content that isn't finished and has less usability than old thing... don't deserve a vacation
    :) just kidding ofc they do, but I hope they will work really hard on it when they get home

    Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934
    Jonuts
    The Arrow Project
    #236 - 2012-07-25 00:55:10 UTC
    fantazmythe wrote:
    come on guys stop putting **** on the dev's . as they say there only human and they sometimes make mistakes. i for one absolutely appreciate all the hard work there doing.

    you all seem to forget that mistakes or no THEY WORK HARD and should be respected for such.

    i personally would like to thank the devs for making eve more awesome each time and doing their best to fix mistakes instead of just sweeping them under the rug like other game dev's do (refering to non CCP game devs).


    P.S at least you have dev's actually replying to you. go to other games and see if the same things happen


    Let me fix that second sentence for you., "As they say, they're only human and they sometimes make absurdly easy to prevent mistakes by being too arrogant to accept unanimous negative feedback and seem to not know what quality control is."

    Lets fix your second paragraph. "You all seem to forget that obscenely easy to prevent mistakes or no, they get paid to do their job and deserve their paycheck. Respect is based on whether or not they do their job well."

    Seriously. Would a bit of accountability over this damn Unified Inventory be too much to ask for?


    All that being said, the only developers I actively hate are every one of them responsible in any way, shape, or form for pushing the unified inventory when it was obviously not ready for release. Beta test on the test server shitheads! Oh, and CCP Optimal. The rest of the devs are alright in my book. Like, you got Punk here talking to us while on vacation? That's awesome. I hope Punk had absolutely nothing to do with ramming Unified Inventory down our throats, because I'd hate to have to hate her :(

    Quote:

    If you don't see a reason for more than one window you have 1) never organised any larger-size library of stuff; 2) never had transfer stuff between a local and a remote location; 3) never compared two things; 4) never partially mixed/merged two things together; 5) and just in general lived a very very strange and disorganised life.


    In all fairness, I live a very very strange and disorganized life, but **** me if I'd try and use a single window for this sort of ****. That's just stupid.

    Quote:
    We tried that in the many many (many) feedback threads before the UI went live. It didn't have much effect, since the thing was pushed onto the live servers with every last flaw left untouched, requiring weeks of patching to even get into a semblance of a working state… oh, and of course, there were the dismissive answers about how that constructive feedback probably didn't mean anything. Roll


    Linked

    Supporting link: CCP Optimal saying our feedback was worthless. Apparently we're too stupid to know the difference between "Different" and "total ****".

    Quote:
    Also, reading this thread (note not just the post above, but the entire thread) has made me really sad, no one deserves to be spoken to like this.


    I'd disagree. The Dev's are paid to do a job. The devs did a **** poor job and really, ignoring that fact took a hell of a lot of willful ignorance. You guys pissed us off first. I'll agree that it's probably been launched in the wrong direction, but someone sure as **** deserves it, and much worse for gross incompetence. There's quite a few folks out there, who if they do their job that poorly, people would ******* die. Pardon if I find gross incompetence something worthy of disdain. Really? A single window inventory? That's like a web browser without tabs. How incompetent do you have to be to think that's a GOOD idea? Now if only I knew who to REALLY lay the blame on :(

    Quote:

    perhaps, but at least she tried to help. what's the old saying?...you catch more flies with honey then you do with vinegar.
    maybe if you were polite CCP Affinity would be more willing to get the right person on the job and replying to this thread?


    Or you can leave a steaming pile of feces in the floor and REALLY attract the flies. That seems to be CCP's method with the Unified Inventory. Can't blame us for flinging their **** back into their faces.



    In other news:

    Certain ships need more rust. Seriously. As my alt is Minmitar, I'm offended on his behalf at the betrayal of our cultural values.
    Feature page is pointless. I want those 10 seconds of my life back :(
    Fenria Del'tore
    Doomheim
    #237 - 2012-07-25 01:04:02 UTC
    Inspiration wrote:


    Max mining yield fit (the reason to go for the hulk over other exhumers) it looses almost 2% yield versus what it is currently. You do get extra HP (not a real lot), but have to sacrifice crystals storage and ore storage space both.
    It will not be a very nice ship to handle.

    To compare it to the new mackinaw and skiff. The hulk mines 15.5% more then a Mackinaw, but when you see what the trade off is, you will feel sick. The mackinaw has 37.5k ore hold (yes you read that right) and more hitpoints. Compared to the skiff, the hulk mines about 26% more, and a bit better when counting drones (skiff has only 15m3 drone bandwidth). The tank of the skiff however easily outranks both Mackinaw and Hulk and still has 17.5k m3 ore bay (10k more then the hulk).


    Please show me this 2% loss in math , because I don't see it at all. The hulk is the exact same mining wise except for an increase in the Ice mining bonus

    Tanking differences are entirely intended. I don't see what the point is bringing those up. As for the mining differences again I do not see it with the numbers that were data-mined. Need math please.

    Quote:
    It is kind of pointless to tank the hulk to the hills, all you get is lower yield then the other ships, a weaker tank and a much smaller ore bay. In your case I would go for the Skiff, since tank is your main concern and the Skiff is still in the same ballpark as you are used to mine.


    Correct, it is pointless to tank a Hulk. The hulk had a crappy tank and it still has a crappy tank. That is fine. It is designed for supported fleet mining ops where you won't care about your tank. I think with the skiff comment you were saying the new skiff mines at the level of a tanked Hulk. Not sure but sounds right.

    Quote:
    Also, you can carry 10 crystals on the hulk in your cargo hold, but in order to be able to switch, you need to make 50m3 free. The true cargo hold not counting trickery is 450m3 (9 T2 crystals). The mackinaw is proportionally smaller and the skiff is the one to go for with half the Mackinaw turrets and same cargo hold size.

    In my opinion, the hulk has been nerfed into a barely useful ship. Even for use in its primary role as that of best miner!


    Here is the only area where I think you are making a valid argument. I would not say that the Hulk is useless, or even barely usefull, it is a great ship as it stands. I do think the size of crystals should be reduced. I Do NOT see a need to increase the hold size over 500m3 on these ships. Also in regard to the size of the regular hold. If a ship is designed to have a bit of tank and take some punishment as some sort of ninja miner, it would need a bigger hold size than others due to the need to have more crystals during ninja mining ops.

    Quote:
    In almost all situations the mackinaw is the much better ship now. That 15.5% mining loss can be partially compensated by with implants and a drone rig. The hulk really needs 2.5k more for a total of 10k ore hold to be still in the game for me. I sure am liking the Mackinaw more now over a hulk, given how things stand. Small errors in mining will undo that 15.5% theoretical benefit pretty quick and being able to watch a movie will be good.


    Those implants work for the hulk if you fly it same as they would for anything else. Saying it makes up for the 15.5% mining loss is silly. Any errors in mining you make with a Hulk you would make with a Mack, so that comment seems silly unless I misunderstood you.


    Quote:
    I haven't looked at the ice numbers, but expect the numbers to scale similar. Mackinaw remains king there with such a large or hold...the bots will tank CCP once more! It is like it was made with them in mind!


    Cargo hold size has nothing to do with CCPs ability to detect bots. Your comment makes no sense.
    Fenria Del'tore
    Doomheim
    #238 - 2012-07-25 01:04:35 UTC
    Sizeof Void wrote:
    CCP Phantom wrote:

    Check our Inferno 1.2 feature page for more information!

    This page is merely decorative and rather uninformative, for both old players and new players.

    For old players, it does not provide any details, whatsoever.

    For new players, it just doesn't make much sense, since the information provided assumes that you already understand the context.

    It would probably work better if these static image pages were replaced with the video dev blogs, and links to the relevant dev blog pages or forum threads.


    100% agree with this post.
    Bulaba Jones
    Bad Influence.
    #239 - 2012-07-25 01:45:13 UTC
    The change with upcoming V3 Angel Cartel ship skins isn't terrible but I'm not particularly sure if I like the look... it looks fairly identical to some T2 Minmatar skins, specifically Vargur. I was expecting some uniqueness but I guess that won't be happening.

    All in all, this doesn't look bad, but what I'm still confused about after watching the Youtube promo video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmcAl5ymojM ) is what the hell is an Ixion? Additionally, I always thought the Daredevil was the Serpentis frigate... if both the Daredevil and the Dramiel are Angel Cartel frigates, why doesn't Serpentis have one?

    I'm also going to take this opportunity to say that the way Minmatar t1 skins lost their classic, unique, legendary red/rusty color is still completely unthinkable.

    Whoever at CCP is responsible for selling rust-free paint to the Minmatar needs to be dragged out and thrown into a geyser or whatever they have in Iceland.
    CCP Soundwave
    C C P
    C C P Alliance
    #240 - 2012-07-25 02:14:57 UTC
    CCP Explorer wrote:
    Rattus Norwegius wrote:
    Someone in CCP should tell us whether we can expect any improvements to the Uni.Inv. soon though, and what they are working towards. Paging CCP Soundwave?
    We'll draw his attention to this thread.


    Hello!

    I am in China right now (it's pretty much the same as Iceland, except everything is upside down) so I can't grab the complete list. We're looking to do a few bugfixes/changes for August (among them, dragging and dropping to create individual windows) and then give you a bigger bunch of changes come winter. Anyway, I'll be back in Iceland sometime late next week.