These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

I guess there's no dev blog for it this time.

Author
Nicolai Serkanner
Incredible.
Brave Collective
#21 - 2015-05-09 19:40:00 UTC
Pak Narhoo wrote:
http://i.imgur.com/9QH5Gzk.png

Dear CCP, If you sneak *^that^ in (many of your customers don't visit Sisi) I hope you're in for the uproar this will create.

/shakes head, packman.... Roll



There was a dev blog for it. Failed troll attempt.
d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#22 - 2015-05-09 19:49:42 UTC
Pak Narhoo wrote:
http://i.imgur.com/9QH5Gzk.png

Dear CCP, If you sneak *^that^ in (many of your customers don't visit Sisi) I hope you're in for the uproar this will create.

/shakes head, packman.... Roll


There's been threads/blogs about this for the past monthish...

Been around since the beginning.

Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#23 - 2015-05-09 21:59:19 UTC
Tippia wrote:
TigerXtrm wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Well, they look better than the last attempt, so there's that.
With these, you can almost tell the ship types apart.


As opposed to the current icons where you can't tell jack **** apart Roll

No, as opposed to the previous attempt. The current ones are decent for differentiation but aren't new and fancy and tied to ISIS, and don't fit in all the odd ship classes that have been invented since the original icons were made.

I'm not sure I'd call these a step forward — maybe one to the left — but they're not a triple salto backwards followed by a broken neck like the ones they presented at first.


The new icons show size classes much better than the current icons in my opinion. I'm sure that within a week people will be used to the new icons and be finding them more helpful than what we have now; definitely a step forward I'd say.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.

Siigari Kitawa
New Eden Archery Club
#24 - 2015-05-10 00:11:44 UTC
Something about less is more?

Why do we need 50 different new icons to classify ships? If you have ship name in your overview, you're good.

Further, why remove the simplicity of old icons? Just to create more visual noise? A single upside down triangle is an asteroid belt. Now I have a jumble of three things in an upside down shape. Not easier to read.

Need stuff moved? Push Industries will handle it. Serving highsec, lowsec and nullsec - and we do it faster and more reliably than anyone else. Ingame channel: PUSHX

Morihei Akachi
Doomheim
#25 - 2015-05-10 07:36:43 UTC
Siigari Kitawa wrote:
Something about less is more?

Why do we need 50 different new icons to classify ships? If you have ship name in your overview, you're good.

Further, why remove the simplicity of old icons? Just to create more visual noise? A single upside down triangle is an asteroid belt. Now I have a jumble of three things in an upside down shape. Not easier to read.

"Visual noise" is (oddly counter-intuitive, but) exactly the phrase here. Less is indeed more.

"Enduring", "restrained" and "ample" as designations for starship components are foreign to the genre of high-tech science fiction and don’t belong in Eve Online. (And as for “scoped” …)

Malou Hashur
Enterprise Holdings
#26 - 2015-05-10 08:20:39 UTC
Its awful, but no surprise there

CCP Philosophy ==>>

  1. If it works, break it. If it’s broken, leave it and break something else.

  2. Ignore all Forum comments that raise issues and concerns about our "features", and bring said "features" in anyway.

Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#27 - 2015-05-10 08:28:03 UTC
DaReaper wrote:
Not only was there a dev blog there was like two fan fest presentation on this. Someone needs to actually read dev blogs me thinks


I read that and was active back then responding to the devblog

This however is round 2, with totally new icons and no dev blog and only visible to those who log on to SISI.
Why back then where the new icons worthy of a dev blog and this time not?

Afraid that some would reject them again and say nice try, please keep iterating on it, maybe one day you'll get it right?
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2015-05-10 10:42:10 UTC
Nope, you will never be told anything ever again forever. There was a Fan Fest panel about it. If I recall correctly, the name of it was "LOL F U HTFU Git Recked YOLO 420 #insidejob".

And it is a real shame that there isn't several weeks before the next patch rolls out, in which time the afore mentioned dev blog could be produced.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#29 - 2015-05-10 10:51:49 UTC
Yes there was a dev blog for this a little while ago. But the symbols portrayed on that dev blog were, in my opinion, far too similar to each other and would be hard to differentiate from ship to ship. The symbols in your link are easier to differentiate but whether people will like them is open to question. Personally I think the crosses we have are not too bad and do not distract whereas the ones you linked would maybe draw attention too much.

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four.   ' The Walking Dead. ' .

Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#30 - 2015-05-10 11:35:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Akirei Scytale
Better than what we have now. Unlike the new map, these were clearly designed with legibility in mind. If proportions get tweaked, this is more at a glance information.

Though the BS icon does not scream "battleship!" IMO.
Xercodo
Cruor Angelicus
#31 - 2015-05-10 11:44:20 UTC
I missed the even older attempt that was silently on Sisi for a while years ago.

They had triangles for small, square for medium, and pentagon for large. I liked how simple it was.

These are good too though.

My only problem I can see in the screenshot is that industrials look far too much like a cruiser.

The Drake is a Lie

Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
#32 - 2015-05-10 12:19:17 UTC
Siigari Kitawa wrote:
Something about less is more?

Why do we need 50 different new icons to classify ships? If you have ship name in your overview, you're good.

Further, why remove the simplicity of old icons? Just to create more visual noise? A single upside down triangle is an asteroid belt. Now I have a jumble of three things in an upside down shape. Not easier to read.


But, you can't sort by "frigates" or "battleships" or whatever. By the same logic, we could say that if you have ship_type in your overview, you don't need icons at all.

If you see something weird in your overview, like a "Cruor", something you may have never encountered before or are otherwise unfamiliar with, it helps to have multiple points of reference. Seeing a "frigate" triangle next to it gives you some extra clues, especially in the short period that it or you are landing, deciding to engage or warp out or burn away or approach, etc.

Having qualitatively different symbols for each hull type rather than relatively different ones that are just larger or smaller, this can help to prevent misidentification of a ship, especially in the instance where there is nothing larger or smaller to compare it to. As it is now, the symbol of a frigate is just a small symbol for a battleship. But, if you don't have a battleship to compare it to, you might easily mistake the smaller, but otherwise identical frigate symbol for the larger battleship symbol.

. . . not saying it's a good or bad change. Just saying that it would seem to have some merit. <3
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#33 - 2015-05-10 12:55:30 UTC
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
But, you can't sort by "frigates" or "battleships" or whatever. By the same logic, we could say that if you have ship_type in your overview, you don't need icons at all.

If you see something weird in your overview, like a "Cruor", something you may have never encountered before or are otherwise unfamiliar with, it helps to have multiple points of reference. Seeing a "frigate" triangle next to it gives you some extra clues, especially in the short period that it or you are landing, deciding to engage or warp out or burn away or approach, etc.

Having qualitatively different symbols for each hull type rather than relatively different ones that are just larger or smaller, this can help to prevent misidentification of a ship, especially in the instance where there is nothing larger or smaller to compare it to. As it is now, the symbol of a frigate is just a small symbol for a battleship. But, if you don't have a battleship to compare it to, you might easily mistake the smaller, but otherwise identical frigate symbol for the larger battleship symbol.

. . . not saying it's a good or bad change. Just saying that it would seem to have some merit. <3

The current icons already allow for what you're talking about. The only issue is with destroyers and battlecruisers, which appear similar to frigates and cruisers. Mistaking the frigate icon for the battleship one does not seem very likely after your first trip in space, since the size difference is big enough to make a clear distinction: the frigate takes up very little space; the battleship one takes up all space. Cruisers might be a better argument there, but they're still easy enough to separate since they're not small, nor do they take up all the icon space available, or anything capital, since they don't have unique icons at all.

What the current icons have is a very clear and concise language that communicates one thing: the differentiation between S, M, and L-sized ships (with a bit of a special case for industrials). They perform this simple job admirably. What the new icons try to do is expand the language to include more information, most notably by adding different shapes. This iteration does it better than the last because it… well… uses different shapes rather than the same one with utterly minute decorations to communicate the relevant differences. So they're not really going after — or even solving — the problem you're describing, but rather a somewhat different but related one.

And yes, whether it's good or bad is a different matter — we can definitely say that it's better than the earlier attempt, though, exactly because they've now added some proper differentiation on the other information axes they want to include.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#34 - 2015-05-11 06:31:28 UTC
US Air Force jets use symbols on one of the panels that represent aircraft type. You need not have to read anything, just be trained on the "wingform" as it was called.

I like this change. It would allow us to further optimize our overviews.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Previous page12