EVE General Discussion

When a ship class does not appear on your overview, especially after a patch where that ship was added or it's name was changed, you should first:

A: Check your overview settings.
B: Complain on the forums immediately.

The correct answer would normally be A, but since EvE is what it is, the correct answer is:
C: All of the above.

The default overview settings are the factory default ones packaged with the game. Anything else is something that you have created yourself, and is thus not a default overview setting.

Of course you might be thinking of "the overview setting that I get when I don't set one", but that would be the default "general" setting, since having any other overview setting means you have made a change.

The only criticism I have of this change is that it would have made sense to add "attack battlecruiser" to any overview which currently has "battlecruiser" selected. This should apply for any future case where CCP splits up an existing ship class into different classes (e.g.: "attack frigates" and "logistics frigates" where they all used to be simply "frigates").

Sure I do.



alternately:



Either one points to the Default Overview settings that automatically get loaded into your Overview when you start a clean install. You know, the settings that CCP maintains. Not the Custom Overview settings that you created and are thus responsible for maintaining.

Which definition of default were you trying to use?

So the funny thing about this is they did change my custom overview during the second patch. Not an isolated case either since several others made the same discovery - they had found the new setting, checked it in their custom setup, saved and then after the next point patch it was once again unchecked IN THE CUSTOM OVERVIEW.

It's absolutely silly for the Dev's to change an overview setting and not turn it on by default for the exact reason that caused the OP to post to start with - it can directly lead to a loss and through the rolling downhill theorem to a large number of pissed off customers.

This, a thousand times this.

It shouldn't have been difficult to say "oh, this overview was last changed before the patch, and it had 'battlecruisers' checked. After the patch, it should have both types of battlecruisers checked, because they would both have shown up on the overview before and we shouldn't break that."

Given that the tiericide initiative will probably result in this happening for other classes as well, implementing the infrastructure to allow this wouldn't be wasted time, and would result in customers being blissfully ignorant that the details of their overview settings changed behind the scenes instead of customers being ticked that their ship just got blown up by a ship they couldn't even see on the overview.

Customers that are blissfully ignorant because something didn't cause them any problems are a lot better than customers that are ticked off because a change caused them problems.

There's such a thing as a reasonable default. Reasonable in this case would have been to follow the rule "if you can see them before the change, you can see them after". It would have translated to meaning that if a custom profile had Show Battlecruisers, that is logically equivalent to showing both Attack and Combat Battlecruisers. This would entail the least amount of impact on the users while adding in the new distinction for finer grained control.

Just as CCP intends to apply the "if you could fly it before, you'll be able to fly it after" principle to the new skill splits for Destroyers and Battlecruisers, they should have applied it to the item classification changes for the Overview.

So as not to miss out on the fun:
@ OP: Those battlecruisers have fit Remote Pebkac Projectors in their utility highs.

What have we learned?

That CCP released an update that effectively broke overviews. Many of us knew it was coming and adjusted our overviews accordingly on patch day; others were unaware.

CCP *could* have been explicit about the needed settings change in the patch notes. Assuming that everyone reads dev blogs, watches dev videos, and combs through the forums for every relevant GM and dev post is bad customer service. I've personally run afoul of a GM rule that was posted on page 12 of a thread that exceeded 40 pages. ALL vital information about a patch needs to be stated directly in the patch notes.

The perfect solution, though, would have been to have the patch automatically show attack battlecruisers if combat BCs were selected. My expectation is for the devs to do their best to accommodate their users where the UI is concerned, NOT for the users to accommodate the whims of the devs.