These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Please simplify the overview types

Author
Quintessen
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2014-11-03 00:47:10 UTC
With the latest change coming in for Phoebe I was looking into the overview again and reminded that the types tab is kind of nutty. While customization using types is fairly critical it's kind of crazy the way that the types are broken down. I'm not sure who needs Angel Asteroid Belt Large Wreck separate from Angel Mission Large Wreck separated, but I can imagine a new player coming into that will feel overwhelmed and any gain for the small number of players who actually customize it down to that level isn't worth the loss to the new players or the players who simply don't feel like scrolling quite so much.

I'm sure that the overview code much like the other original code for the game is really messy, but this is something that would be nice and very NPE-oriented. I think it would be very possible to simplify down the types to a point that will give the vast majority of players what they need in terms of customization without going overboard and irritating those looking for a simpler experience.

I see so much discussion around the overview and sharable overviews was a good step forward, but I think it demonstrates that setting up the overview is something that often requires additional skill to get right not because people are trying to think about what should be there, but because getting it to do what you want is difficult.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#2 - 2014-11-03 01:43:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
No. Absolutely not. Do not start lumping things together in the overview categories and removing the granularity we currently have. Considering how supremely vital the Overview is, the filtering and sorting needs to be as customizable and powerful as possible. If that means there's some complexity and a few newbies are confused, then so be it. Overview profiles can be shared with incredible ease now.

If it's too complicated for you, this is one area of the game where you really need to learn how to use it properly instead of crying for simplicity.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#3 - 2014-11-03 03:11:41 UTC
-1 absolutely not.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#4 - 2014-11-03 03:58:09 UTC
As inherently critical as NPE is, and I agree that the overview as a bit of a daunting task to setup for a new player, there is a reason the overview settings are as big as they are. You don't want such a critical element of the game to mess you up just because you can't tell it to "show this, but not that". Just because it may take someone new awhile to configure their overview, I don't think that's a bad thing either...maybe it SHOULD take awhile, maybe the overview should be something you need to take some time to personalize rather than something that can be setup in minutes.

Not everything that is complex or diverse in Eve is unnecessarily so; the overview is one of them.

Sorry, but -1.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Quintessen
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2014-11-03 04:22:30 UTC
I understand the critical nature of the Overview and that changing it is somewhat controversial. My intention is not to remove the power of the overview, but to reduce the number of entries down where it makes little to no sense to turn one on, but not the others.

Is someone going to turn Mission Khanid Cruiser on, but leave Mission Mordu Cruiser off? How frequently? Have you ever done it intentionally, with forethought, and kept that setting because it had value?

Why is there an entry for Tutorial Drone? Could that not be rolled into Tutorial objects and, frankly, when would that even come up outside the tutorial?

There are almost 200 _types_ listed in the overview settings. Just going through that list take a lot of time. It's also not like there aren't a lot examples of players getting confused over similarly named objects: Large Collidable Object and Large Collidable Structure anyone?

Is it a terrible idea that we create groups like:

Starbase Defensive Structures
Starbase Offensive Structures
Starbase Industry Structures (possible broken up into 3 or more groups)
Starbase Storage Structures

instead of the 26 items we have now. I'm not even suggesting we be that aggressive in grouping, but it seems like reading through, understanding and managing 200 or more types in the overview just isn't good for the new player.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#6 - 2014-11-03 05:03:01 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Quintessen wrote:
I understand the critical nature of the Overview and that changing it is somewhat controversial. My intention is not to remove the power of the overview, but to reduce the number of entries down where it makes little to no sense to turn one on, but not the others.

I think the problem is related to why we can't have modular ship skins right now (see: each ship skin is an entirely unique database entry).

Each rat type, no matter how mundane the difference is, is an entirely unique entry in the system.

Methinks you are basically seeing the NPC database (or part of it) through the overview settings.

Could it be cleaned up? Maybe. But I don't see much going for or against it. Like the others said... having as many options available, even though it may be confusing for a newbie, is preferable to lumped together groups that include things you do/don't want to see.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#7 - 2014-11-03 07:04:21 UTC
I can see that there are some edge-case points, such as the aforementioned "tutorial drone", an entity you will likely never see again after your first day. I just don't like the risk of them going under the hood with the overview of all things, only to possibly mess things up (no offense, CCP, just saying) just to make something that takes an hour or two at most the first time around take a little less time and a few less mouse clicks.

Now, if you were to have to rebuild your overview settings from scratch each expansion release, I would side with you, but you don't. And, once you have some basic ones built, you can even add and remove entities on the fly without even having to open the overview settings to make those adjustments (CCP even added some default ones that are pretty good to start with). So, adjusting and/or creating new filters takes considerably less time.

If I were to be perfectly honest, I'd say I have no problem with them giving the overview objects lists a slight trim here or there, but A) merging or removing some "unneeded" parts of those lists may not hurt you or I, but might hurt others and B) runs the risk of creating glitches/bugs on a pretty central part of the game, which would adversely affect potentially everyone. I hear "don't fix what isn't broken," a lot here, and I honestly think this is one of those occasions.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."