These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Jackie Cane
Chaos Gate
#841 - 2014-07-27 21:45:30 UTC
JITA is broken.

The Market is not ready at the moment. Please try again later.
Theodore Knox
Ducks in Outer Space
#842 - 2014-07-27 23:35:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Theodore Knox
How did you manage to break the market with a patch heavy on Industry content?

Could it possibly be the Sunday night spike in Industry jobs creating server side lag as every one of these jobs runs an inquiry to calculate the market adjustedprice for setting the install cost "tax"?

Covering yourselves in glory here, CCP... really, take a bow.

Quote:
The Market is not ready at the moment. Please try again later.
Kristopher Arione
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#843 - 2014-07-27 23:38:02 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Funless Saisima wrote:
ETA on when the Drone Avionics skill downgrade will be fixed? I filed a petition but the GM said to come here. Which isn't terribly helpful.


It is being worked on, I think the guys are planning an update early this week.


what about advanced drone avionics?
Slicr
#844 - 2014-07-28 04:52:28 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Salpun wrote:
Nullarbor: Industry is not working on Sisi for me and some others after the last build any idea when it will be back.

Timeline on the next pass of UI updates?


We will update SiSi on Monday.



Do think the problems we are currently having with the marketplace could get copied over to SiSi also?

I believe in being Pro-Active as Opposed to Reactive. Reactive tends to be more costly in time and money.
Emrys Ap'Morgravaine
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#845 - 2014-07-28 05:31:15 UTC
So after being told repeatedly both in 1 to 1 questions, and publicly during the panel at fanfest, that BPO's which were perfect before hand would be perfect afterwards. Primarily in this case Capital BPO's with their awful rounding faults.

It turns out that this was what, a lie? Or just regular incompetence?

All my hull BPO's now have calculable wastage which with the "new and improved math" is going to take 2/3rds of a year and about 1.5Bil ISK per BPO to fix.

Can I get a CCP comment?
Just a Hick
#846 - 2014-07-28 06:17:23 UTC
1. The guest list when docked in a station. Frequently it fails to update when a pilot docks. You can show as being the only pilot in the station, yet there may be dozens docked. To refresh you must click Agents or Offices, then back to Guests again. This problem started with the latest release update.

2. You are docked in a station. The local list shows all blue. The Guests list shows some red pilot(s). The pilots are actually blue and the Guests list is lying. This problem started before the latest release update and has been an issue for more than few months.

3. Stations I could once use for Manufacturing and Research, no longer allow access. Nothing has changed in standings, nor in station configuration. This problem started 4 days ago, which was 3-4 days after the latest release update.

4. The infamous "local bug" still exists. When you first log in you may discover that Local shows red names. Yet each of them have a blue standing (via Alliance standings). If you force a refresh of Local, the names turn blue. This is a long known problem and has not been addressed in the latest release update.

5. Drone damage appears to have been significantly reduced in the latest release. About 2-3 days prior to the release I bought a new Gila and was happy with drone damage. Starting the day of the latest release update the drone damage per hit dropped 20-50%. Without a 3rd party DPS counter, it is impossible to know how much change happened. The ship fitting window shows the same DPS from drones, but drone hits are about 20-50% less than before the latest update release.

I would go on, but basically the condition of Eve server/client software is deplorable. Please work on fixing known problems before releasing new versions which only add to the problem list. And before releasing new versions, try doing some serious QA/QC on the code! Imagine having Nokia release phones that refuse to dial if you are facing in the wrong direction and then telling you that they're too busy working on the next release to bother fixing the problems! You offer a pay-to-use product, now take it seriously enough to justify paying you to use it!
Angie Chatter
#847 - 2014-07-28 08:38:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Angie Chatter
Can i maybe get a CCP response to the "Jumping BPC install" list, since this problem drives me crazy atm.

What i mean is that i have my BPC sorted by whatever rule, most bpc have the same stats, so there is no real "sorting" needed.

1) Install a new BPC job.
2) BPC list updates and a newly "gray" unusable BPC is inserted wherever it pleases.
3) Install a new BPC job.
4) List yet again updates and adds a new "gray" and than randomly resort the list.

What this means is that if i target the next BPC i want to install after the list randomly reorders itself, the selected BPC could be on the bottom of the list now. It could also be that u have 25 "gray" unusable BPC in the front of your list, while having to scroll up&down to find usable BPC.

Maybe this is a new minigame? "Seek the usable BPC"

This is extremely annoying and i have no clue how this could go live in such a broken state.


PS: Again, i also want to filter out those "gray" entries entirely! I have a separate Job tab, so all this does is to clutter my BPC list and makes it harder to find usable copies.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#848 - 2014-07-28 09:25:48 UTC
Theodore Knox wrote:
How did you manage to break the market with a patch heavy on Industry content?

Could it possibly be the Sunday night spike in Industry jobs creating server side lag as every one of these jobs runs an inquiry to calculate the market adjustedprice for setting the install cost "tax"?

Covering yourselves in glory here, CCP... really, take a bow.

Quote:
The Market is not ready at the moment. Please try again later.



Could be a coincidence. A DDOS against the market server might produce similar results?
Logan Joriksa
Shockwave Unlimited
RAZOR Alliance
#849 - 2014-07-28 10:10:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Logan Joriksa
1. The blueprint for a Capital Ship Assembly Array is still called an X-Large Ship Assembly Array Blueprint.
Raphael Asanari
pricorp
#850 - 2014-07-28 12:04:44 UTC
Kristopher Arione wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Funless Saisima wrote:
ETA on when the Drone Avionics skill downgrade will be fixed? I filed a petition but the GM said to come here. Which isn't terribly helpful.


It is being worked on, I think the guys are planning an update early this week.


what about advanced drone avionics?


Seriously, this issue needs addressing, not just from a PVE standpoint but from a PVP standpoint. I can't even "fix" your damn "gift" CCP cause the skillsheet still says level 5. FFS get your act together.
Arcy Tander
Of Corsets a Corp
#851 - 2014-07-28 12:35:57 UTC
Sjaandi HyShan wrote:
I'm trying to manufacture a Tech II ship, but every assembled Tech I ship of that type in my Ship Hanger (NPC station) counts as -1 to the total. Currently to produce, I have to have more non-assembled ships than assembled Tech I ships in the station to produce their Tech II equivalent.


Sjaandi HyShan, thanks for your post. That turns out to be the issue which affected my ability to build a Bustard.

Its hard to explain puns to kleptomaniacs, because they take things literally.
Laylah Crowley
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#852 - 2014-07-28 13:08:29 UTC
My drone avioncs 4 was fixed to lvl 5 but today its back down to 4... sigh
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#853 - 2014-07-28 13:10:51 UTC
Logan Joriksa wrote:
1. The blueprint for a Capital Ship Assembly Array is still called an X-Large Ship Assembly Array Blueprint.



I brought that up on the sisi thread a few weeks ago....

lets get bugs fixed

#pickyourbattles


LOL :)Bear
Qinby
ImNo6
#854 - 2014-07-28 14:25:15 UTC
What happend with invention using decryptors?

This worked after deploying crius but stopped working aprox 27/7.

When installing invention job with decryptor (in this case Incognito Accelerant Run +1 ME +2 TE +10) the Industry UI gives the wrong info on produced BPC.

In all cases im talking about inventing an Ishtar (Heavy Assault Cruiser).

Invention without decryptor is said to produce a BPC with ME-2 and TE -4 (According to http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/eve-industry-all-you-want-to-know/).

This is slightly confusing as well since in my World ME-2 and TE -4 should mean u need -2*1% (2% MORE MATERIAL) and -4*2%(8% MORE TIME).

IN THIS CASE IT SEEMS TO MEAN ME 2 AND TE 2 wich produces a BPC that uses 2% less material and 4% less time AND THAT IS THE RESULT YOU GET WHEN YOU INVENT WITHOUT DECRYPTOR.

THERE SEEMS TO BE A SLIGHT CONFUSION BETWEEN THE ME/TE VALUE AND WHEN TALKING ABOUT THE % OF EFFECT IT GIVES.
THERE ALSO SEEMS TO BE A CONFUSION ABOUT WHEN THE VALUE SHOULD BE POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE.

AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND THERE IS NEVER A NEGATIVE ME/TE VALUE on a BPO/BPC (a positive ME/TE is Always a reduction so using a "-" sign is only confusing)

My conclusion of the "terminology" is that when talking about Blueprint research it is ME and TE meaning the max value is ME 10 (10%) reduction in material and TE 10 (20%) reduction in time.

When you talk about decryptors IT IS NOT ME AND TE IT IS % (otherwise why give a decryptor TE +10 since you get 4 without decryptor add 10 and you get TE 14 and no Blueprint can have more than 10)



The right info using a decryptor (Icognito Accelerant) should on succesful invention be, Runs 2 ME 4 (4% reduction) and TE 7 (14% reduction).

This is the result I got until yesterday (27/7).

Then this happened....
When installingt tje job i got the right info "Outcome" ME 4% TE 14% and 2 runs BUT when i look at "job in progress" and check the outcome it shows ME 2% (ME 1) and TE 4% (TE 2) and 1 run.

In other Words it seems to disregard the decryptor.
What it will deliver I dont know yet....

A small suggestion:

Scrap the ME/TE value and change them to % meaning making the Max values for a BPO/BPC ME10% and TE 20% (why the conversion to %?) "should be simple".

Stop Writing +/- when it regards ME/TE (cant realy see the Point) and declare all values regarding ME/TE are positive and they are "amount of reduction".

Looking forvard to feedback.
EroGuy
Perkone
Caldari State
#855 - 2014-07-28 15:17:16 UTC
Arrrggh Drone avionics not fixed yet, so I guess CCP was having great weekend.
Theodore Knox
Ducks in Outer Space
#856 - 2014-07-28 15:19:27 UTC
KIller Wabbit wrote:
Theodore Knox wrote:
How did you manage to break the market with a patch heavy on Industry content?

Could it possibly be the Sunday night spike in Industry jobs creating server side lag as every one of these jobs runs an inquiry to calculate the market adjustedprice for setting the install cost "tax"?



Could be a coincidence. A DDOS against the market server might produce similar results?



From a philosophical perspective, I err on the side of not believing in "coincidence". :-)

Maybe it is, but it does strike me as odd that the market issue seems to intensify with increases in the number of jobs.

Totally happy to be shown to be wrong, as long as its fixed soon.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#857 - 2014-07-28 15:31:14 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Greyscale
Dareth Astrar wrote:
Takanuro wrote:
Hmm, I'm not querying the 30 day limit, that's basically how it was already. The actual Show Info for the BPO shows a max run per copy in the copying section of 1, so at the moment my only option for is to make X copies of 1 Run, I can't do 1 copy of X Runs.

If I pick something like a Capital Armor Plate print then the UI clearly shows me that I can do 1 copy of 40 Runs, as soon as I choose a Capital Module though it only allows 1 Run per copy.


Yes, I had reported that previously in the test server thread. I thought it was very silly as well, as we normally build multiple of those modules in one go, and creating copies of 1 just chews all the factory slots every character has to queue up jobs for manufacture from copies.

Given the massive time changes in producing many items, such as capital equipment modules, fighters etc, there is going to be a massive influence on existing stock on market, which appears to have not been thought about ahead of time.


I think we've kicked the max runs on a lot of low-run blueprints upwards in this morning's patch.

Aylari wrote:
I'm not sure if this is an issue or not, but the Algos blueprint is limited to 10 runs per copy and has a copy time of 2:40 compared to ALL other destroyer bpos at 20 runs and 2:00 time.

It's the only ship I can find so far that has copy times different than all other ships of it's class. Frigates are all equal in this regard


Should also be fixed today, I missed that one when special-casing the destroyers.

Wendy Holl wrote:
When copying a t2 bpo i can at most make it a 10-run

Seriously?


Yup, sorry.

Darkblad wrote:
It appears like the new Thukker Component Assembly Array (typeID 33868) itselt will be able to be built in (Rapid) Equipment Assembly Arrays, not Station only. By Design or Bug?


I'm reasonably sure that you can now build all starbase structures within starbases, totally intentional :)

Theodore Knox wrote:
How did you manage to break the market with a patch heavy on Industry content?

Could it possibly be the Sunday night spike in Industry jobs creating server side lag as every one of these jobs runs an inquiry to calculate the market adjustedprice for setting the install cost "tax"?

Covering yourselves in glory here, CCP... really, take a bow.

Quote:
The Market is not ready at the moment. Please try again later.


Totally unrelated to all the Crius content, caused solely by certain types being moved into misconfigured type groups. Should be fixed now!

[edit] Correction, all the above "fixed today" things should be "fixed tomorrow"
Qinby
ImNo6
#858 - 2014-07-28 16:03:49 UTC
Angie Chatter wrote:
Can i maybe get a CCP response to the "Jumping BPC install" list, since this problem drives me crazy atm.

What i mean is that i have my BPC sorted by whatever rule, most bpc have the same stats, so there is no real "sorting" needed.

1) Install a new BPC job.
2) BPC list updates and a newly "gray" unusable BPC is inserted wherever it pleases.
3) Install a new BPC job.
4) List yet again updates and adds a new "gray" and than randomly resort the list.

What this means is that if i target the next BPC i want to install after the list randomly reorders itself, the selected BPC could be on the bottom of the list now. It could also be that u have 25 "gray" unusable BPC in the front of your list, while having to scroll up&down to find usable BPC.

Maybe this is a new minigame? "Seek the usable BPC"

This is extremely annoying and i have no clue how this could go live in such a broken state.


PS: Again, i also want to filter out those "gray" entries entirely! I have a separate Job tab, so all this does is to clutter my BPC list and makes it harder to find usable copies.



There is a "small advantage" with having "the gray/unususable".
If you install many similar jobs ex. armourplates and dont just have the exact amount of BPO/BPC in that division it can be hard to keep track of how many you installed then its good to be able to see also how many you are making (this ofcourse means that the info you get in the Outcome window is correct and that might be questionable...)

Being able to filter them should ofcourse be an option but it might be easier to organise your Blueprints so that you only have the BPO/BPC you intend to use in the batch in a separate division so when everything is gray you are finnished with your installment.

Theng Hofses
State War Academy
Caldari State
#859 - 2014-07-28 16:48:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Theng Hofses
Small buy annoying:

When ordering jobs by time left, can be the order "ready for delivery" and then by time. Rather than shortest to longest time followed be "ready for delivery" Just treat the jobs that are ready to be delivered like jobs with 0 time left... logically, like it was before Crius broke logic just to be rad.
Ghee Bhaag
UMEC
#860 - 2014-07-28 17:13:04 UTC
I don't know if this is behaving as intended but hope it's not.

I was trying to build a Basilisk in a station in Lustrevik. As would be the norm, the materials are all stored in the item hangar and the Osprey required was in the ship hangar. However, the industry panel would not start the job as all items were not in the same location (as it saw it). Trying to drag and drop the ship into the item hangar did not help.

The solution was simple - I used a station container and dumped everything into it and then pointed the drop-down menu to the container. However, it all seems very messy and overly complicated compared to before. And what would have been the solution if there were no station containers available to me?

I'm guessing that's not how it's intended to work. I've been away from game for the last 2 years but I don't ever remember that issue with building a T2 ship before.