These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Make SiSi less time-consuming to use / more testing-friendly?

First post
Author
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1 - 2011-11-02 01:44:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Ganthrithor
Hey, how about making some changes so SiSi is actually useful as a testing server instead of being a dumb waste of time:

- Remove SP penalties for dying in T3s-- its a test server, why do I have to train for a week every time I lose a test setup?
- Actually seed all items on the market (and preferably contracts as well, or move contract items to the market so they can be seeded)
- Add some features that don't exist on TQ-- a "duplicate" function would be awesome so you could fit up one ship and then copy it several times instead of having to spend hours and hours fitting the same mods to the same hulls over and over again


I'm sure there are many more things that could help SiSi be useful, but these would be a good start. The more frequent mirrors are nice.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#2 - 2011-11-02 02:26:05 UTC
Ganthrithor wrote:

- Add some features that don't exist on TQ-- a "duplicate" function would be awesome so you could fit up one ship and then copy it several times instead of having to spend hours and hours fitting the same mods to the same hulls over and over again


a) Setup 1st ship, save fitting

b) Buy a few dozen of everything that you fit

c) Enter new hull, load fitting, apply to ship

d) Apply rigs (don't think those get applied)

Or at least that's how it used to work...
Comodore John
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2011-11-02 02:44:09 UTC
SP loss - makes sisi consistent with TQ, if there was a bug with T3 skill loss and no one on sisi loss skills, how would we know before it hit TQ?

Seeding - bad idea. The idea is to keep test conditions as close to TQ as possible, which means not flying the shiniest thing you can fit.

Stuff for sisi only - spending time developing anything that solely serves a purpose for sisi is a waste of time which could be spent developing stuff for TQ.
Darth Skorpius
352 Industries
#4 - 2011-11-02 03:15:36 UTC
Comodore John wrote:
SP loss - makes sisi consistent with TQ, if there was a bug with T3 skill loss and no one on sisi loss skills, how would we know before it hit TQ?

Seeding - bad idea. The idea is to keep test conditions as close to TQ as possible, which means not flying the shiniest thing you can fit.

Stuff for sisi only - spending time developing anything that solely serves a purpose for sisi is a waste of time which could be spent developing stuff for TQ.


i agree on the sp loss and seeding issues, sisi isnt thier for peopel to test out a new fit, its there for testing new content and bug squashing

as for stuff for sisi only, they have already developed tools that only get used for testing. the moveme channel is a prime example of this. however i do agree that developing new features should be done before things that would only be used for testing, but if a dev wants to use thier spare time to work on something that does make testing on sisi easier then let them.

one thing i would liek to see, not just for sisi but for tq as well is faction items available on the open market just like faction ships.

also, if they make changes to faction/officer mods then they need to make those available for testing, currently that would mean seeding them via contracts
Comodore John
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2011-11-02 03:22:05 UTC
Darth Skorpius wrote:
Comodore John wrote:
SP loss - makes sisi consistent with TQ, if there was a bug with T3 skill loss and no one on sisi loss skills, how would we know before it hit TQ?

Seeding - bad idea. The idea is to keep test conditions as close to TQ as possible, which means not flying the shiniest thing you can fit.

Stuff for sisi only - spending time developing anything that solely serves a purpose for sisi is a waste of time which could be spent developing stuff for TQ.


i agree on the sp loss and seeding issues, sisi isnt thier for peopel to test out a new fit, its there for testing new content and bug squashing

as for stuff for sisi only, they have already developed tools that only get used for testing. the moveme channel is a prime example of this. however i do agree that developing new features should be done before things that would only be used for testing, but if a dev wants to use thier spare time to work on something that does make testing on sisi easier then let them.

one thing i would liek to see, not just for sisi but for tq as well is faction items available on the open market just like faction ships.

also, if they make changes to faction/officer mods then they need to make those available for testing, currently that would mean seeding them via contracts


The moveme is actually helpful to CCP in getting players to the main testing system as well as mass tests.

Seeding any faction stuff always results in people only using them which is far from TQ conditions (partly why CCP is working on fixing the seeding script so they don't get seeded). Seeding faction modules will only result in people flying the best things available which is as far from TQ as you can possibly get.
Anikan Fernardo
Shedload of Zeds
#6 - 2011-11-02 04:17:09 UTC
Comodore John wrote:


Seeding any faction stuff always results in people only using them which is far from TQ conditions (partly why CCP is working on fixing the seeding script so they don't get seeded). Seeding faction modules will only result in people flying the best things available which is as far from TQ as you can possibly get.


You've already got everyone running around with HG Slaves/Crystals, honestly I can't think of a ship in my hangar on TQ that isn't fit with some form of faction item be it ammo, module or both. If it's available on the TQ market it should be available on the Sisi market to make conditions as close to TQ as possible. That said, I agree that there shouldn't be any contract seeding.
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2011-11-02 04:57:58 UTC
There are literally setups I want to test that can't be done with T2 items-- not only is the performance drastically lower, but a lot of them won't fit together at all due to fitting requirements.

Making SiSi as much like TQ as possible? Are you joking? Everything costs 100 isk, and I've seen people flying around in things like Adrestias. SiSi is nothing like TQ to begin with. It's a test server, we should be able to test whatever we want. If I want to test deadspace fit tristans I should be able to.

For example, the dudes I play with often want to get on SiSi and test ships we fly (which often have faction gear, or at the very least faction ammo) against groups of "normal" ships that we'd usually encounter on TQ. As it is you either can't do it if its a prospective setup / EFT project, or you can only do it once per mirror if you already own the ship on TQ. It's really frustrating.
Missile War
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#8 - 2011-11-02 05:53:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Missile War
Ganthrithor wrote:
There are literally setups I want to test that can't be done with T2 items-- not only is the performance drastically lower, but a lot of them won't fit together at all due to fitting requirements.

Making SiSi as much like TQ as possible? Are you joking? Everything costs 100 isk, and I've seen people flying around in things like Adrestias. SiSi is nothing like TQ to begin with. It's a test server, we should be able to test whatever we want. If I want to test deadspace fit tristans I should be able to.

For example, the dudes I play with often want to get on SiSi and test ships we fly (which often have faction gear, or at the very least faction ammo) against groups of "normal" ships that we'd usually encounter on TQ. As it is you either can't do it if its a prospective setup / EFT project, or you can only do it once per mirror if you already own the ship on TQ. It's really frustrating.



listen to CJ... my god....(feels weird to say this :S)

ship testing > THIS IS A TEST SERVER, ITS FOR BUG TESTING, NOT Test-Your-FailFit-ship-server
everything costs 100 isk > good cuz otherwise we couldn't fly anything AT ALL
people in adrestias? > fault in the seeding script, will get fixed IIRC
test whatever we want > THIS IS A TEST SERVER, ITS FOR BUG TESTING, NOT Test-Your-FailFit-ship-server
deadspace fit tristans? > THIS IS A TEST SERVER, ITS FOR BUG TESTING, NOT Test-Your-FailFit-ship-server


also > the dev's don't really want to make a seperate code for sisi, why? cuz its wasting time for a testserver just so whiny little babies can test their failfits and they can better use that time on something usefull like fixing bugs or whatever.
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#9 - 2011-11-02 07:00:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Ganthrithor
Missile War wrote:
listen to CJ... my god....(feels weird to say this :S)

ship testing > THIS IS A TEST SERVER, ITS FOR BUG TESTING, NOT Test-Your-FailFit-ship-server
everything costs 100 isk > good cuz otherwise we couldn't fly anything AT ALL
people in adrestias? > fault in the seeding script, will get fixed IIRC
test whatever we want > THIS IS A TEST SERVER, ITS FOR BUG TESTING, NOT Test-Your-FailFit-ship-server
deadspace fit tristans? > THIS IS A TEST SERVER, ITS FOR BUG TESTING, NOT Test-Your-FailFit-ship-server


also > the dev's don't really want to make a seperate code for sisi, why? cuz its wasting time for a testserver just so whiny little babies can test their failfits and they can better use that time on something usefull like fixing bugs or whatever.


It's also for balance testing. How are you going to test ship balance without testing all possible fittings? Great argument.

Want more people to test things on SiSi? Make it easy for them to put ships together and play spaceships.

Also, your post needs more caps and more "fail" in it.
CCP Konflikt
Doomheim
#10 - 2011-11-02 10:23:48 UTC
Ganthrithor wrote:
[quote=Missile War]listen to CJ... my god....(feels weird to say this :S)

It's also for balance testing. How are you going to test ship balance without testing all possible fittings? Great argument.

Want more people to test things on SiSi? Make it easy for them to put ships together and play spaceships.


Balance can be tested on a very broad spectrum using the modules available. There may be fits that are not possible without rare modules, but in comparison to the 350,000 subscribers, there are few players with faction modules.

We balance according to majorities not minorities.

To answer your original points:

Fitting ships - Store your fitting, buy [100 x number of modules fitted] of everything you need for that fitting, assemble using stored fittings, you can make a lot of ships in a short amount of time. (This is what was used in the fanfest PvP tournament.)

SP Loss - This is removing existing functionality, which removes testing of tech 3 ship loss and also would require development time. It's not going to happen.

All market Items - The dogma effects of modules can be tested no matter what value of the effect. So for the majority of testing a 5% module is the same as a 10% module. When it has happened in the past the only notable difference was an increase in ban requests.
Contracts are copied over at the start of a mirror, you can either rush to Jita on mirror day and buy them all or hope you kill someone in 6-cz49 with faction mods.
The final option is to go ratting or run dead space complexes.

As I frequently point out, we develop for tranquility and not for singularity, favoring our 45000-50000 daily players over the 200 that frequent Singularity.
On top of this the team who created the move-me bot have disbanded and are working on separate projects, so there will be no new test server tools for a long time to come (if ever).

So to summarise : Singularity is for testing for bugs, not to be an EFT with simulation.

CCP Konflikt Quality Assurance Engineer Team Trilambda

Grideris
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2011-11-02 11:27:17 UTC
CCP Konflikt wrote:
So to summarise : Singularity is for testing for bugs, not to be an EFT with simulation.


Quoting an important public service announcement for the benefit of all EVE Kind. Seriously, the number of people that I see thinking that Sisi is some lala practice happy land makes me sad.

http://www.dust514.org - the unofficial forum for everything DUST 514 http://www.dust514base.com -** the** blog site with everything else DUST 514 you need

Kenpachi Viktor
Perkone
Caldari State
#12 - 2011-11-02 11:39:02 UTC
CCP Konflikt wrote:
the team who created the move-me bot have disbanded and are working on separate projects, so there will be no new test server tools for a long time to come (if ever).


Cry

The sisi launcher is very awesome

A war that would’ve involved 20,000 players, 75% of nullsec space, and hundreds of supercapitals was halted not by diplomacy, but by a game mechanic so dreadful that those who have experienced it previously have no desire to do so again. - Fix POS & SOV

CCP Konflikt
Doomheim
#13 - 2011-11-02 14:12:49 UTC
Kenpachi Viktor wrote:
CCP Konflikt wrote:
the team who created the move-me bot have disbanded and are working on separate projects, so there will be no new test server tools for a long time to come (if ever).


Cry

The sisi launcher is very awesome


The SiSi launcher was made by Team Special Circumstances, the team who made the moveme bot was Team Riding Mower. With the exception of myself, they're the same team now. Team Special Circumstances focuses on builds and deployment mechanisms.

CCP Konflikt Quality Assurance Engineer Team Trilambda

CCP Phantom
C C P
C C P Alliance
#14 - 2011-11-03 10:18:43 UTC
Off topic posts removed. Please stay on topic, thank you.

CCP Phantom - Senior Community Developer

ShadowandLight
Trigger Happy Capsuleers
#15 - 2011-11-03 18:22:12 UTC
Man, Kon, I find myself nearly polar opposite of your response here. I am 100% of the mindset that the test server should be easy to access, have open ability to test ships and fittings and overall ease of use!

CCP Konflikt wrote:


Balance can be tested on a very broad spectrum using the modules available. There may be fits that are not possible without rare modules, but in comparison to the 350,000 subscribers, there are few players with faction modules.



Really? Testing faction modules on a TEST SERVER is the entire point of a TEST SERVER. Its so I dont have to spend x millions / billions of ISK to determine if that fit works well...

CCP Konflikt wrote:

Fitting ships - Store your fitting, buy [100 x number of modules fitted] of everything you need for that fitting, assemble using stored fittings, you can make a lot of ships in a short amount of time. (This is what was used in the fanfest PvP tournament.)


Ok I agree here.... buy extra modules folks, they are very cheap..

CCP Konflikt wrote:

SP Loss - This is removing existing functionality, which removes testing of tech 3 ship loss and also would require development time. It's not going to happen.


Thats seriously CCP's response? We go to a test server to test a fitting out, it doesnt work, so therefor we have to wait days to re-skill on the TEST SERVER... Really? You find this acceptable?

CCP Konflikt wrote:

All market Items - The dogma effects of modules can be tested no matter what value of the effect. So for the majority of testing a 5% module is the same as a 10% module. When it has happened in the past the only notable difference was an increase in ban requests.
Contracts are copied over at the start of a mirror, you can either rush to Jita on mirror day and buy them all or hope you kill someone in 6-cz49 with faction mods.
The final option is to go ratting or run dead space complexes.


This.. is equally insane. Just add some code and seed faction items on the TEST SERVER.... come on.... it cannot be that hard.
CCP Konflikt wrote:

As I frequently point out, we develop for tranquility and not for singularity, favoring our 45000-50000 daily players over the 200 that frequent Singularity.
On top of this the team who created the move-me bot have disbanded and are working on separate projects, so there will be no new test server tools for a long time to come (if ever).


Wow.... I thought CCP had changed its mentality to be more useful and focus on EVE..... Asking you guys to devote a few days of coding to improve the ability to use THE TEST SERVER to TEST SHIPS is too much to ask? I am really frustrated with this response Kon.... and disappointing. Maybe more then 200 people would use the TEST SERVER if you would make it more useful.

Let me point something out. ITS CALLED A TEST SERVER... MAKE IT USEFUL FOR TESTING (not only finding your game bugs, which lets be honest, every subscribing pilot in New Eden has been basically beta testing Eve since its release..... On Tranqulity....)


Xeross155
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2011-11-03 18:38:00 UTC
The test server was created with the purpose of testing new additions to the EVE Universe (As far as I am aware). The fact you can cheaply test new fittings is just an added bonus.
Lithalnas
Dirt 'n' Glitter
Local Is Primary
#17 - 2011-11-03 21:17:49 UTC
can I ask CCP to do something? Please ask us to test stuff in a certain category. If you want to test stuff, tell us what you changed and people will test it, and everything relating to it quite thoroughly.

https://www.facebook.com/RipSeanVileRatSmith shoot at blue for Vile Rat http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=73406

Comodore John
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2011-11-03 21:34:40 UTC
Lithalnas wrote:
can I ask CCP to do something? Please ask us to test stuff in a certain category. If you want to test stuff, tell us what you changed and people will test it, and everything relating to it quite thoroughly.


Won't work as well as you think. Introducing new stuff may lead to breaking new stuff so it's necessary to test almost everything to make sure it doesn't happen, and if it does, to bug report it.
Laurici
British Petroleum Industrial
#19 - 2011-11-03 21:45:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Laurici
its a test server to test code. like the devs said, its not your personal eft simulation. also, as for lost t3 sp, participate in a mass test, get free SP, get skills back for free? and jeez, if you need a deadspace mod to make something work extra well, then it ain't a good fit, if it won't do 90% of what you want it to do with T2 mods then it ain't a good fit. or, if it works with T2 stuff, use the isk that would have been spent on 1 deadspace mod to buy another one of the ship.

hang on, shadowandlight, aren't you the guy who just had his supers aborted by montolio? surely you have bigger things to worry about than not being able to buy Estamel's invul on sisi
Franky Sugaz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#20 - 2011-11-03 23:37:18 UTC
I don't understand all the complains against the op requests, aside for the t3 sp loss that is a huge change in game machanics and not necessary, asking for every ships and modules to be seeded seems legit to me.