These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Crius Issues

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
corv jacksons
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#481 - 2014-07-23 16:38:35 UTC
are ccp doing anything about the cost of jobs in pos when there are your own?
Ryuu Towryk
Perkone
Caldari State
#482 - 2014-07-23 16:40:11 UTC
corv jacksons wrote:
are ccp doing anything about the cost of jobs in pos when there are your own?

Working as designed, I'm afraid.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#483 - 2014-07-23 16:47:06 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
The whole SC/Titan customer service stuff is a joke

I have had them on speeddial for 2 days

You're lucky. You're getting a better response than I am.

All my recent dealings with CCP customer service have been case studies in how not to provide a customer with service.

It makes me want to throw my shoes at them through the internet tubes.
Raven Powers
Rubber Chicken Bombers
#484 - 2014-07-23 16:52:24 UTC
Looking at the industry tab on asteroids/ice asteroids yields a black info screen. (nothing shows up under that tab)
Phoenix Czech
AZ Solutions CZ
#485 - 2014-07-23 16:52:55 UTC
New graphical interface of industry is really nice. I tryed to work with it and I have to say "well done CCP". Finaly the industry is easy to understand and our mouses will love it :-). But here all my compliments finish !

Bugs bugs bugs. I realy do not understand, that even when you have realy big list of unsolved bugs, you give this to live server. Let us make it clear - we are your customers - we are not testing engeeners dedicated for finding bugs. You do not pay us for finding bugs. When you publish in your dev blogs details about funcionality - so players expect, that it will work exactly like this. Most of other software developers previously test their products before releasing it. I thing that better way is to postpone release date and use this time for solving problems and bugs, than release unfinished "something" and hope, that it will "somehow" work and that comunity will help you find bugs.

My decision is to stop all industry and research and wait month or two until you will solve all the problems. I guess many more other players will do the same.

one sugeestion
In new industry window in "facilities" tabs are shown only available facilites in the current reagion (work same as market). When you gave us possibility to start jobs remotly limited only by jumps (not regions), it would be nice to show list off all available facilites based on distance (including all nearby regions). It could realy help when tryding to find cheapes place to manufacture etc. Or it should work like this and actual condition is bug?

One thing I probably did not catch or it is a bug??
I tryed to check instalation prices of all industry and research on my corporation pos and on NPC stations in nearby systems. Instalation cost on my POS was highter than on NPC station. First of all - why do I have to pay instalation cost, when I own the facility? Second - This has no reason for players to run own POS. Fueling it and paying instalation costs (even higher than on NPC station) leads to decicion - unanchore pos and start using NPC stations. Is it a bug or it was intended? Or am i doing something wrong in industry window?
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate
Wildly Inappropriate.
#486 - 2014-07-23 16:53:10 UTC
corv jacksons wrote:
are ccp doing anything about the cost of jobs in pos when there are your own?


Its the same as running your own car, it costs money to drive and maintain. Same as the build slots in a pos. It costs money to maintain(pos fuel) and money to run(buildcost when you build) simple as that. Just because you own a factory doesnt mean it is free to build with
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#487 - 2014-07-23 16:53:12 UTC
Ryuu Towryk wrote:
I really don't think this 6 week dev cycle is a good idea...

I'll have to disagree with you on that point. I think it is a good idea.

However, this release is an example of how not to use a 6 week Dev cycle. Because it is clear that many of the features deployed in this release needed more time to be developed, reviewed and tested. Therefore they should have postponed much of the content for 6 weeks, finished it to a higher standard and then released it in a good state. This is one of the very reasons why they have moved to a 6 week Dev cycle and yet they failed to avail themselves of it's advantages.

What we have recieved is an unpolished, feature light and bug heavy expansion... essentially the worst of all worlds. But it is not because of a 6 week Dev cycle.
CCP Claymore
C C P
C C P Alliance
#488 - 2014-07-23 16:56:52 UTC
Retar Aveymone wrote:
A question: I know that for jobs started in a pos with the blueprint in the station were moved to the station. I understand that for supercaps if we dare touch those jobs, deliver into station, etc then customer support is going to drop the hammer and we are to let customer service deliver the jobs themselves to the pos and delete the ship if the pos is torn down or destroyed, all that was very clear.

For other jobs, are we required to still pretend those jobs are in the pos, or can they just be delivered to the station? And can the pos be torn down, or should we maintain the pos until the jobs are delivered, even though they're supposedly at the pos?

I don't actually have any jobs that fall into the latter category but people in our alliance have asked and I'd like to make sure whatever they're supposed to do is clear so nobody gets in trouble or loses anything.


For all jobs that are not supercaps, you are allowed to deliver them in station.They are now in the station and not in the pos so the pos can also be removed.

Quality Assurance Analyst Team Psycho Sisters
Don Aubaris
#489 - 2014-07-23 17:04:47 UTC
Reprocessing in a Reprocessing array at a POS just gives you the minerals without the nice screen you get in a station.
Reprocessing is hence done 'blindly' since you have no idea of the output.

Not calling that nice interface is clearly a bug. Right?

(and no...I didn't check all the posts to see if they accepted/rejected it)
Hadubrandt Koeppl
Hybrid Flare
#490 - 2014-07-23 17:05:17 UTC
I am unable to continue or kill corp research jobs that were on halt in POS labs before the expansion went live. It says the installation is offline. petition in game raised regarding this yesterday. so far no reply at all.
H3llHound
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#491 - 2014-07-23 17:05:21 UTC
every six weeks 20 random supers will be delivered
Hadubrandt Koeppl
Hybrid Flare
#492 - 2014-07-23 17:08:52 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
Ryuu Towryk wrote:
I really don't think this 6 week dev cycle is a good idea...

I'll have to disagree with you on that point. I think it is a good idea.

However, this release is an example of how not to use a 6 week Dev cycle. Because it is clear that many of the features deployed in this release needed more time to be developed, reviewed and tested. Therefore they should have postponed much of the content for 6 weeks, finished it to a higher standard and then released it in a good state. This is one of the very reasons why they have moved to a 6 week Dev cycle and yet they failed to avail themselves of it's advantages.

What we have recieved is an unpolished, feature light and bug heavy expansion... essentially the worst of all worlds. But it is not because of a 6 week Dev cycle.


I fully agree on that. Especially going live with obvious bugs that had already been reported on SiSi (like the forgotten adjustment of the assemby array sizes).
Pheusia
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#493 - 2014-07-23 17:13:01 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
Ryuu Towryk wrote:
I really don't think this 6 week dev cycle is a good idea...

I'll have to disagree with you on that point. I think it is a good idea.

However, this release is an example of how not to use a 6 week Dev cycle. Because it is clear that many of the features deployed in this release needed more time to be developed, reviewed and tested. Therefore they should have postponed much of the content for 6 weeks, finished it to a higher standard and then released it in a good state. This is one of the very reasons why they have moved to a 6 week Dev cycle and yet they failed to avail themselves of it's advantages.

What we have recieved is an unpolished, feature light and bug heavy expansion... essentially the worst of all worlds. But it is not because of a 6 week Dev cycle.


Well most of the stuff in Crius was originally slated for Kronos, which was the last 6 month expansion.
Hadubrandt Koeppl
Hybrid Flare
#494 - 2014-07-23 17:17:11 UTC
Pheusia wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
Ryuu Towryk wrote:
I really don't think this 6 week dev cycle is a good idea...

I'll have to disagree with you on that point. I think it is a good idea.

However, this release is an example of how not to use a 6 week Dev cycle. Because it is clear that many of the features deployed in this release needed more time to be developed, reviewed and tested. Therefore they should have postponed much of the content for 6 weeks, finished it to a higher standard and then released it in a good state. This is one of the very reasons why they have moved to a 6 week Dev cycle and yet they failed to avail themselves of it's advantages.

What we have recieved is an unpolished, feature light and bug heavy expansion... essentially the worst of all worlds. But it is not because of a 6 week Dev cycle.


Well most of the stuff in Crius was originally slated for Kronos, which was the last 6 month expansion.


Which makes not fixing the bugs even worse.
We got used to two royal fuckups a year, but one every six weeks is a but much...
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#495 - 2014-07-23 17:18:46 UTC
Pheusia wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
Ryuu Towryk wrote:
I really don't think this 6 week dev cycle is a good idea...

I'll have to disagree with you on that point. I think it is a good idea.

However, this release is an example of how not to use a 6 week Dev cycle. Because it is clear that many of the features deployed in this release needed more time to be developed, reviewed and tested. Therefore they should have postponed much of the content for 6 weeks, finished it to a higher standard and then released it in a good state. This is one of the very reasons why they have moved to a 6 week Dev cycle and yet they failed to avail themselves of it's advantages.

What we have recieved is an unpolished, feature light and bug heavy expansion... essentially the worst of all worlds. But it is not because of a 6 week Dev cycle.


Well most of the stuff in Crius was originally slated for Kronos, which was the last 6 month expansion.

Which also doesn't reinforce any criticism of the 6 week Dev cycle.

It is certainly a criticism of CCPs ability to deliver quality content on schedule. And I think they owe the players an appology for Crius. But proper use of their 6 week Dev cycle could have fixed this.
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#496 - 2014-07-23 17:23:40 UTC
CCP Claymore wrote:
Retar Aveymone wrote:
A question: I know that for jobs started in a pos with the blueprint in the station were moved to the station. I understand that for supercaps if we dare touch those jobs, deliver into station, etc then customer support is going to drop the hammer and we are to let customer service deliver the jobs themselves to the pos and delete the ship if the pos is torn down or destroyed, all that was very clear.

For other jobs, are we required to still pretend those jobs are in the pos, or can they just be delivered to the station? And can the pos be torn down, or should we maintain the pos until the jobs are delivered, even though they're supposedly at the pos?

I don't actually have any jobs that fall into the latter category but people in our alliance have asked and I'd like to make sure whatever they're supposed to do is clear so nobody gets in trouble or loses anything.


For all jobs that are not supercaps, you are allowed to deliver them in station.They are now in the station and not in the pos so the pos can also be removed.

Thanks for the quick response, I appreciate it and the clarification.
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#497 - 2014-07-23 17:33:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Rift
Bad Bobby wrote:
Pheusia wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
Ryuu Towryk wrote:
I really don't think this 6 week dev cycle is a good idea...

I'll have to disagree with you on that point. I think it is a good idea.

However, this release is an example of how not to use a 6 week Dev cycle. Because it is clear that many of the features deployed in this release needed more time to be developed, reviewed and tested. Therefore they should have postponed much of the content for 6 weeks, finished it to a higher standard and then released it in a good state. This is one of the very reasons why they have moved to a 6 week Dev cycle and yet they failed to avail themselves of it's advantages.

What we have recieved is an unpolished, feature light and bug heavy expansion... essentially the worst of all worlds. But it is not because of a 6 week Dev cycle.


Well most of the stuff in Crius was originally slated for Kronos, which was the last 6 month expansion.

Which also doesn't reinforce any criticism of the 6 week Dev cycle.

It is certainly a criticism of CCPs ability to deliver quality content on schedule. And I think they owe the players an appology for Crius. But proper use of their 6 week Dev cycle could have fixed this.



That's the problem CCP has shown they cant properly use the 6 week cycle. Other games and companies maybe but not this one.They will want to push something out every 6 weeks no matter how broken it is instead of having to skip one expansion or it be really really light in content.

Plus their stated things they will be working on include reworking some of the most ignored and worst systems in the game (corp management and POS's)
Jason Xande
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#498 - 2014-07-23 17:33:15 UTC
I have not noticed any change in the Corporate Hangar Array cargohold size. Does this change affect only those built after the patch?

"Corporate Hangar Arrays cargohold has been increased from 1,400,000 m3 to 3,000,000 m3"
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#499 - 2014-07-23 17:35:13 UTC
Jason Xande wrote:
I have not noticed any change in the Corporate Hangar Array cargohold size. Does this change affect only those built after the patch?

"Corporate Hangar Arrays cargohold has been increased from 1,400,000 m3 to 3,000,000 m3"



its a known issue. they state it would be fixed "soon"
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#500 - 2014-07-23 17:36:40 UTC
Nirnaeth Ornoediad wrote:
When bidding for a team, if you bid too low, a message states:

Bid needs to be higher than X

However, bids less than 1.00 ISK above X are also rejected, with the same message. That is, you can't raise X by 0.01 ISK: you need to raise it by 1.00 ISK.

X + 1.00 ISK works
X + 0.01 ISK does not


Good - that .01 ISK crap is already a PITA in the market. No need to make it that way here too.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.