These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
First pagePrevious page8910
 

EVE Online: Inferno 1.2 to be deployed on Wednesday, August 8

First post
Author
Andrew DuLac
LA MEGADITTA
#181 - 2012-08-08 13:15:33 UTC
lifer Hinken wrote:
Where they not talking about releasing them on this patch? CCP, when will they be seeded?


Before it, I would prefer the station access with the pg from the apartments, in order to punch some hostiles Smile
Silly Noob
Cherry Defense Systems
The Initiative.
#182 - 2012-08-08 13:23:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Silly Noob
:sigh: - Another big patch, another batch of problems with the launcher having to download the same basic patch three times because... well I don't really know why this time - it downloaded the whole patch and then immediately started calculating the patch again - twice so far - and each time the patch is a different size. WTF CCP? Why can't you scan for available patch data and *USE IT* - or not make GD changes mid-stream?

So GD frustrating... esp since I'm on limited bandwidth while deployed. You guys really need to get this fixed - my 100MB patch has turned into a 300MB patch... so far.

Oh, and FWIW, your import patch BS doesn't work either. Thanks for the craptastic launcher. I will be back on every big patch to **** and moan about this - just sayin'.

Having said all that - thanks for the improvements to the game - I've been looking forward to them and am excited to see these changes play out over time... now if I could only get the game to patch... :sigh:

UPDATE: Looks like 3rd time's the charm again... finally got one client patched... let's see if the others take it before you make any more changes...
Eli Williams
Goats With Frickin' Rocket Launchers
#183 - 2012-08-08 13:34:09 UTC
Silly Noob wrote:

Oh, and FWIW, your import patch BS doesn't work either. Thanks for the craptastic launcher. I will be back on every big patch to **** and moan about this - just sayin'.


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1762423#post1762423

You tried unzipping this and importing?
RadioactiveHobo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#184 - 2012-08-08 13:46:36 UTC
So what changes have been made to the spawning of anomalies in nullsec? I've been scanning down a system in Provi now for a few minutes too many waiting for any of the hubs to respawn and none of them have, there hasn't been any listed for some time now.
CaptainNighthawk
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#185 - 2012-08-08 13:47:31 UTC
RadioactiveHobo wrote:
So what changes have been made to the spawning of anomalies in nullsec? I've been scanning down a system in Provi now for a few minutes too many waiting for any of the hubs to respawn and none of them have, there hasn't been any listed for some time now.


Same here, anomalies are not re spawning
Twilight SparkIe
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#186 - 2012-08-08 13:50:09 UTC
yeah, here too
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#187 - 2012-08-08 13:50:20 UTC
Hakaru Ishiwara wrote:
Lordy, I hope that we can turn off the weapons meta data contextual pop-up windows. The last thing that I need are big obstructions to clicking and r-clicking in the heat of battle.


At the least we need a switch to turn it off on non-optimal type modules (I pretty much know the name of my cloaking device). Need a switch to hide it on these type of modules, sort of like the hide passive module switch.

rekcuT J
Anarch Shithead Squad
#188 - 2012-08-08 14:28:25 UTC
OutCast EG wrote:
Quote:
Mission Overlay
See the bookmarks for your current mission in an easy to access panel.
Interact with mission sites, set destination, warp to etc.

Great, but again: you're placing stuff in the region where most players keep their localchat. Which is disappointing.


can we have an option to remove this by any chance?
Dhakamis
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#189 - 2012-08-08 23:10:52 UTC
Shereza wrote:
At this point the only thing that really concerns me about the changes is how this is going to affect the usage of low slots on mining barges and exhumers. Unless expanded cargohold modules are updated to have even just a minimal impact (say 5%) on ore holds they are going to be rendered virtually if not absolutely useless on any and all non-combat mining ships. Likewise the overall reduction in hull HP values, despite the overal increase in armor and shield HP values, makes me wonder just how useful damage controls will be for increasing EHP, as a percentage and not an absolute value, when compared to current numbers.

Frankly, I don't even understand why these ships have such low hull HP values given that ORE ships all currently favor Hull as the HP sink of choice. Does this herald a change to all ORE ships that will result in, for example, the orca's hull HP being reduced while it sees a significant increase in armor and shield HP values or is this just a somewhat arbitrary change in light of "standard" ORE ship design?

Omnathious Deninard wrote:
@DEVs in what case do you thiink the skiff would be usable. It is pointless in high sec, low/null sec it will just get tackled then blown up.


Well, presuming that the mining turret statements are typos the skiff and procurer will sit there, mining around as much as a covetor with mining barge 2 (which yes, I know, is technically impossible) would right now and being very, very hard to suicide gank while packing more cargo into it than it currently can now.

CCP Masterplan wrote:
If the appropriate bay is full, the module/drone will deactivate as normal, and excess ore is lost.


Why isn't the overload automatically transferred? Given how much the standard cargo bays were nerfed this would have been a nice bone to toss ore miners.

Also have ice harvesters been fixed so that they no longer shut down prematurely compared to mining lasers and strip miners? It gets pretty annoying fairly fast to have, for example, an 8km3 cargo mackinaw and have your harvesters shut down after just two cycles if you don't dump your cargo between cycles while having 9km3 cargo allows the harvesters to function just fine and continue to initate potential "partial cargo" pulls.

CCP Masterplan wrote:
You seem to be trying to tank the wrong barge...


No, he isn't. He's just min-max'ing. This is EVE after all. If you aren't min-max'ing you're playing Hello Kitty Online.

_____

Insofar as the proposed/intended changes to the standings transactions window go, I have to agree that removing information from the players' hands, even if it's just relating to NPC corporations, is a bad move until or unless the tooltips for the transactions window itself can pick up the slack by displaying more, and more accurate, infomration regarding what caused the transaction in question.

Edit: On a secondary note these changes to the inventory UI will be somewhat underwhelming until I can drag/drop fitted modules onto the ship hangar to have them transferred to my item hangar again, double-clicking on ships in the ship hangar opens them up instead of making them my active ship again, and I can stop worrying about the ship hangar section in the list view pane automatically expanding any time it feels like it regardless of whether or not I want it expanded. Ever.


I agree about the uselessness of expanded cargohold mods. CCP dodged a problem by introducing the new ore hold in order to be able to give barges "substantial storage capacity for their mined ore without invalidating Industrial ships in the process". However, they just created a new problem with expanded cargo mods, because they are now only useful for industrials, since all barges have extremely small cargo holds now. Will there be new expanded ore hold modules now to continue to allow capsuleers more options in mining fittings? It seems to me like making two separate item holds on barges; one a general-purpose cargohold, but extremely small (and therefore pretty useless) and the second a larger, specific-use ore hold; is absolutely ridiculous and doesn't make anything simpler. CCP dodged one problem and made a mess Sad
Dystopia Arkaral
Doomheim
#190 - 2012-08-08 23:17:39 UTC
looks like mine repetedly is broked, none of my drones are mining repetedly
CCP Punkturis
C C P
C C P Alliance
#191 - 2012-08-09 09:24:48 UTC
KIller Wabbit wrote:
CCP Punkturis wrote:
Herucle Custeau wrote:
I agree with the above poster.
Why remove "Details" in the Standing Transactions window for npcs. It works on Tranquility now, and now all the standings transactions are going to be a big mystery, because I can't see the reason now.
I can't see any transaction details on Sisi now, and I am really going to miss them.

People are going to end up with -10 in faction standing, and they are not going to see which npcs or structures they shot to get there. It was really useful to see those things when i was a newbie.

Please bring back the Transactions Details window for Standing Transactions for npcs, npc corporations, and factions.


I messed up, I didn't realize they were used for NPC standings. I'll fix it as soon as I can on Tuesday (Monday is holiday). If you'd file a bug report it would speed up the process (F12 - bug report). Thanks!


Punkturis trolls!!

She knows the process will take several weeks. Twisted



not true! the fix was out yesterday with all the changes. TAKE IT BACK!

♥ EVE Brogrammer ♥ Team Five 0 ♥ @CCP_Punkturis

Desmont McCallock
#192 - 2012-08-09 09:30:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Desmont McCallock
Whoever messes with Puncturis messes with the entire EVE community.
Killer Wabbit you 're powned. Twisted
CCP Explorer
C C P
C C P Alliance
#193 - 2012-08-10 11:09:00 UTC
We updated the new module button tooltips today, Friday, in Inferno 1.2.2, based on your feedback.

Please find information on the new and updated tooltips in this post from CCP Soundwave: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=142498

We'd love to hear your feedback on today's update in that thread.

Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @CCP_Explorer

Challu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#194 - 2012-08-10 22:35:21 UTC
Hi CCP!

The changes you have made to Uni Inv are nice.

I hated the earlier iteration with a passion because it made me want to tear hair of all manner right out as I did indy or POS stuff..

After playing with it for a day, I'm happy to see that they're much more intuitive and I can get it to behave more predictably.

There are a few things that still aren't right, but I'll delve on those after some more days of playing around.

Thanks for all the hard work!
First pagePrevious page8910