These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EVE Online: Inferno 1.2 Feedback

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Daedalus II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2012-08-08 14:34:56 UTC
MR rockafella wrote:
Daedalus II wrote:
MR rockafella wrote:

The result is that a build of 100 runs/units of X-something that requires 50% of r.a.m.- tool one whould require 50 of r.a.m.-tool but build quota window wont accept 50 r.a.m.- tool it will only accept when 100 r.a.m.- tool is there and once build is press it only removes 50 r.a.m.- tool and there is 50 r.a.m.- tool left.

That is not necessarily a bug.
So you have a blueprint that requires one unit of R.A.M. Each R.A.M will then take 50% damage in the build process.
Naturally then you still require 100 R.A.M to start a run of 100 items. The game then could have returned the 100 R.A.Ms to your hangar with 50% damage, but instead it repackages them into 50 R.A.Ms with 0% damage.

Don't mistake something taking 50% damage 100% of the production runs for something taking 100% damage 50% of the production runs.



your wrong how, cause thats not how it uses ram, it takes 1 ram and cycles it once it starts building it, that process is very noticeable when lookin into a hanger when clicking build. and let me make it clear, there is nothing wrong with build process, ITS the build quota window that calculate an incorrect amount and certain bpo's where the ram usage is less than a certain procentage.


How the game processes the R.A.M once the production starts is irrelevant. The only relevant thing is the blueprint saying that X amount of R.A.M is needed. One could wish that the blueprint was smart enough to recalculate depending on percent damage, but the job of the blueprint is not to be clever, it is to provide exact production directions. This is not necessarily a bug, only a design consideration.

Compare with invention and the interface you require for invention. With your way of reasoning, as the invention interface takes 0% damage, you wouldn't even need to have one to start the invention run.
LillaRinn
#42 - 2012-08-08 14:38:59 UTC
Ho hohoho wrote:
new anomalies are not generated in 00 claim space

in the other thread, CCP Greyscale has replied that this is being looked into already :)

Radio Control Flying and Aerial Filming www.rc-forc3.com
Moebbius
The Phoenix Uprising
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#43 - 2012-08-08 14:40:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Moebbius
About the: tooltip that you get when hovering over items that fitted

Remove it or make it that you need put you mouse over the item for a longer time, cause now its bloody anyoing.
Esp. in pvp you activate an item and then you get the tooltip.

The old one whas way better.

Edit:
Or make an option where you can turn those tooltips off.
Syr Dunstin
Final Conflict UK
#44 - 2012-08-08 14:43:37 UTC
Megnamon wrote:
Zilero wrote:
Bring back the 120 m3 cargohold of the Amarr rookie ship!


Before the patch, in order to use a rookie ship as a cyno ship you needed:

1x Cyno module
1x Micro Aux module

Cyno IV skill.

After the patch, caldari + minmatar + gallente needs:

1x cyno module

Cyno IV skill.

Whereas the amarr now needs:

1x cyno module
1x cargohold expander (does not matter which, T1 is fine).

Cyno IV skill.



Do you see the problem?


The problem I see is that you are crying because you can no longer use a free ship to cyno alts. HTFU and buy a ship!

While the choice of illustrations may not be the best, it's still a valid point...Is there a reason the Amarr Rookie frig has a smaller cargo hold than the others??
LillaRinn
#45 - 2012-08-08 14:47:54 UTC  |  Edited by: LillaRinn
Syr Dunstin wrote:
While the choice of illustrations may not be the best, it's still a valid point...Is there a reason the Amarr Rookie frig has a smaller cargo hold than the others??

I can only think this would be because of the significantly lower ammo volume required to run the frigate's primary weapon system - the gist of this has always been around in other classes too, if memory serves...

Radio Control Flying and Aerial Filming www.rc-forc3.com
Tanaka Aiko
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#46 - 2012-08-08 15:06:11 UTC
so from what say minutes, we won't have any content patch until december now ?
we'll have only fixes if needed, nothing else until winter 2012 expansion ?
CCP Fear
C C P
C C P Alliance
#47 - 2012-08-08 15:09:38 UTC
Regarding the module tool-tip:

We will be adding an option to disable them and possibly a delay as well in a patch very very soon! (Can't say specific dates yet I'm afraid)
Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
#48 - 2012-08-08 15:10:12 UTC
James Selkirk wrote:
Because I trained Ethnic Relations to have a multicultural corporation, not to hire allies in wars I'm not about to get into.


Wanna bet you get dec'd in a short amount of time? BlinkPirateBlink

Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene.
MR rockafella
Santa's Factory
#49 - 2012-08-08 15:18:30 UTC  |  Edited by: MR rockafella
Daedalus II wrote:
MR rockafella wrote:
Daedalus II wrote:
MR rockafella wrote:

The result is that a build of 100 runs/units of X-something that requires 50% of r.a.m.- tool one whould require 50 of r.a.m.-tool but build quota window wont accept 50 r.a.m.- tool it will only accept when 100 r.a.m.- tool is there and once build is press it only removes 50 r.a.m.- tool and there is 50 r.a.m.- tool left.

That is not necessarily a bug.
So you have a blueprint that requires one unit of R.A.M. Each R.A.M will then take 50% damage in the build process.
Naturally then you still require 100 R.A.M to start a run of 100 items. The game then could have returned the 100 R.A.Ms to your hangar with 50% damage, but instead it repackages them into 50 R.A.Ms with 0% damage.

Don't mistake something taking 50% damage 100% of the production runs for something taking 100% damage 50% of the production runs.



your wrong how, cause thats not how it uses ram, it takes 1 ram and cycles it once it starts building it, that process is very noticeable when lookin into a hanger when clicking build. and let me make it clear, there is nothing wrong with build process, ITS the build quota window that calculate an incorrect amount and certain bpo's where the ram usage is less than a certain procentage.


How the game processes the R.A.M once the production starts is irrelevant. The only relevant thing is the blueprint saying that X amount of R.A.M is needed. One could wish that the blueprint was smart enough to recalculate depending on percent damage, but the job of the blueprint is not to be clever, it is to provide exact production directions. This is not necessarily a bug, only a design consideration.

Compare with invention and the interface you require for invention. With your way of reasoning, as the invention interface takes 0% damage, you wouldn't even need to have one to start the invention run.



invention has nothing to do with this, nor does it requires ram.- tools and as i statet, this is a bug in the "Manufacturing build quota"
Decryptors nor interface are on a % value as required, i dont understand why alot of people can't wrap their head around this the only thing i can imagen is that this group doesnt have very much experience in building t2.

its very simple on blueprints below 55% required ram.-tools that number when doing more than 3 runs in "manufacturing build quota" is simply incorrect. do to a bug where i guess that the procentage gets converted to a integer and rounded to 1,

I want to build 1000 veldspar mining crystall II i only need 15 but it wont allow me to click build intil i put in 1000, and when its build there is 985 left in stack and you visual see it only takes 15 from the stack and cycle's through one by one.

I rest my case.
Hestia Mar
Calmaretto
#50 - 2012-08-08 15:27:19 UTC
Pedant in Chief reporting in here.

This part of the text in the Audio section needs to be re-written:

"A rogue Amarr arms dealer has been slayed ending an issue which caused laser weapons to sound without firing when viewing fittings."

This should read "A rogue Amarr arms dealer has been slain...", or, "has been flayed" - you decide!

H
James Selkirk
Moofus Security Industries
#51 - 2012-08-08 15:29:55 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
James Selkirk wrote:

[snip]

"Ethnic Relations skill changed into Diplomatic Relations. The old effect of segregating corporations by races is gone, so all corporations can have all races, always. The skill now reduces the cost to hire allies in war. The skill will not be reimbursed as it is not being removed, but changed." (Italics added)

So, Ethnic Relations has a changed name and a changed function, yet somehow this does not count as removing a skill and adding a whole different skill. Because I trained Ethnic Relations to have a multicultural corporation, not to hire allies in wars I'm not about to get into.


From a technical perspective, it's the same type with the same internal ID number. To count as removing a skill and adding a whole different skill - again, from a technical perspective - it'd mean deleting the old skill and adding a new one with a different ID.


Honestly, I don't give a damn about the skill points, and I can see where you're coming from in technical terms - what bugs me is that it has been described in a fashion that wouldn't make it past a third grade grammar teacher. It may be repurposing a slot, but it now does something COMPLETELY UNRELATED to its prior purpose. This would be on a par with, for example, reassigning Drones skill as ORE Frigate Piloting. You can default everyone to be able to operate 5 drones, but it doesn't mean that any particular pilot would have chosen to learn to fly ORE frigates.


Sable Moran wrote:
James Selkirk wrote:
Because I trained Ethnic Relations to have a multicultural corporation, not to hire allies in wars I'm not about to get into.


Wanna bet you get dec'd in a short amount of time? BlinkPirateBlink


Only if I can bet on YES.
Izzara Arran
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#52 - 2012-08-08 15:32:46 UTC
EVEHQ calculated my falloff range for my Vargur at 63.3km. Show Info says 63.3km.

However, the new tooltip claims 67km. Will fit a different ship and see if I still get different results.
Arec Bardwin
#53 - 2012-08-08 15:37:22 UTC
Vjorn Angannon wrote:
I too would like the option to disable the module into popup. Perhaps add the option into the HUD options menu?
Count me in on this.
succulent desire
Big-Daddy's
#54 - 2012-08-08 15:39:45 UTC
HOLY CRAP!!!! The frig changes make the Attack Frigates better than the lower tiered T2 Interceptors now.
Stigman Zuwadza
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#55 - 2012-08-08 15:42:11 UTC
UI Stuff ....thats STILL bugging me, so it must be bugging others. Ugh

• Please, please, please make the UI persist in an open state when you log off / log in when inside a station, my scenario with 3 accounts and 5 alts:

log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
log on, open UI, click item hangar, start, log off
...and so on.....and so on......and so on......and......

Other windows seem to persist between logins, People & Places, Market, Wallet ....please, Please, PLEASE make the UI behave in the same manner.

Althought I can't speak for everyone, it would be handy if the default view for the UI was in fact the item hangar. I have noticed that some times when I open the UI the item hangar is the default view but this is very inconsistent.

...and another non-patch day thinggy Lol

Please can you make it so that market order settings (like duration and jumps) are saved per pilot and not at account level.

Fixing these 2 issues may save my fellow pilots and me a gajillion clicks in the next week, imagine what we'd save in our Eve lifetime. Big smile

Fly safe. o7

It's broken and it's been broken for a long time and it'll be broken for some time to come.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#56 - 2012-08-08 15:44:44 UTC
Izzara Arran wrote:
EVEHQ calculated my falloff range for my Vargur at 63.3km. Show Info says 63.3km.

However, the new tooltip claims 67km. Will fit a different ship and see if I still get different results.


Tooltip is adding your optimal range, which should make up the difference.
Penny Ibramovic
Wormhole Engineers
#57 - 2012-08-08 15:45:58 UTC
Context menus for bookmarks are obscured by site labels in the system map still.

When a site is visited, a convenient label is created pointing to the site in the system map. This would be more convenient if the label didn't then prevent any interaction with the site and bookmark within the system map by not allowing the context menu to display. Any attempts to right-click on the bookmark, or even just hover over the bookmark to get the tooltip for additional information, fails. This makes it next to impossible to distinguish one similarly named anomaly with another, even if bookmarks are made with specific details.

The same behaviour prevents easy recognition of wormholes. One unstable wormhole is the same as another unstable wormhole, going by the system labels, but it's important to know which one your target is sitting on. Without the tooltip, or the context menu to get you in to warp there, all the convenience of the label is lost.

Living and scanning in w-space on almost a daily basis is frustrating with this bug. More so because it continues not to be addressed.

Post from 31 May 12

Post from 24 June 12
Izzara Arran
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#58 - 2012-08-08 15:46:00 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Izzara Arran wrote:
EVEHQ calculated my falloff range for my Vargur at 63.3km. Show Info says 63.3km.

However, the new tooltip claims 67km. Will fit a different ship and see if I still get different results.


Tooltip is adding your optimal range, which should make up the difference.


Seems weird to add them and state is simply as falloff, considering it also states the optimal. Thanks though, that is the missing number.
Cyrus Mierre
The Forsaken Legion
#59 - 2012-08-08 15:48:13 UTC
Erm...I just teleported. From Jita 4-4 to Amarr Zorast station. (No it wasn't because I jump cloned : originally I had JC'd to a clone in Daran, flew to amarr emperor station, dropped off a ship, travelled to jita in a pod, then I docked up, got the evemail about revieving a rookie ship due to docking in pod, then suddenly I'm back in Amarr zorast station).

At first it said I was stuck and unable to dock from amarr zorast, and should file a petition. Instead of doing that I re-logged. I was still in amarr zorast, but was able to undock this time. I am currently re-flying to Jita...
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#60 - 2012-08-08 15:48:44 UTC
Penny Ibramovic wrote:
Context menus for bookmarks are obscured by site labels in the system map still.

When a site is visited, a convenient label is created pointing to the site in the system map. This would be more convenient if the label didn't then prevent any interaction with the site and bookmark within the system map by not allowing the context menu to display. Any attempts to right-click on the bookmark, or even just hover over the bookmark to get the tooltip for additional information, fails. This makes it next to impossible to distinguish one similarly named anomaly with another, even if bookmarks are made with specific details.

The same behaviour prevents easy recognition of wormholes. One unstable wormhole is the same as another unstable wormhole, going by the system labels, but it's important to know which one your target is sitting on. Without the tooltip, or the context menu to get you in to warp there, all the convenience of the label is lost.

Living and scanning in w-space on almost a daily basis is frustrating with this bug. More so because it continues not to be addressed.

Post from 31 May 12

Post from 24 June 12


Have you filed a bug report on this?