EVE Information Portal

Please stop dragging your feets Just give us the old icons back........

Yep, except for the little detail that for the POS example they decided to just kill it off completely instead of fixing it.

If that decision was made out of laziness ("ah ****, lets just grab this standard ship coding modules, do some little modifications and get away with it..."), incompetence ("uh, look at that mass of poor documented code - there´s no way I´m gonna get that right... ") or true insight in the better for the game ("its too complex, nuanced and flexible for our players and this game!") is up to anyones guess.

- if the player base thinks a feature is fine and no one is complaining (overview) => it gets fixed with a complete overhaul

- if the player base wants a fix for a feature (certain pos aspects like containers and some menues) => the feature gets completely discontinued and replaced by something completely new that makes part of the old users vomit blood ....

good job devs .... really good job.

It´s sad too see, but for me it feels like its CCP itself, that needs some overhaul.

lol maybe we need to post on all forum threads... then maybe they will get the picture as they will b at least seeing them as they delete them

CCP I appreciate a response but honestly this is just not good enough.

You have underestimated the number of players who use 90% and accepted that the icons don't look good at 90% also. Now as to whether you should have known how many players use 90% - that is a debatable point – the discussion of which probably won't yield any fruitful results.

But there is a known problem with UI scaling so let's draw a line under this, revert to the old icons and let people play again. Then you can begin the big discussion with players and CSM and see what options are available to move forward – but at least roll it back first.

Is there some loss of face associated with a roll back that you are not willing to countenance? Come on – just take the big decision and get the game playable for the majority.

It's not just the mistake of underestimating the numbers who use 90% scaling – it's also your actions upon discovering the mistake that says a lot about the company attitude. We all make mistakes – I haven't got a problem with that. But “toughing” it out and saying we are looking at it while leaving the game in such a state is going to get people quitting. Something no-one wants.

Roy

I try to send them a fax but it's off because it is obviously that they not read the forum.

Why don't you make a vote for the icons? Old one VS new one

My guess is: Management says "nope" but I will stand corrected if I am proven wrong.


1) Actually, I liked the idea to use it like modules and ship fitting. This feels a lot more like "Eve" than "windows online"

2) You mean icons. The overview itself SHOULD receive a facelift. 5 tabs is clearly not enough for some, there are still options lacking, sorting doesn't work the way it should, filters are being ignored, making a second instance of the Overview is something the vast majority of people that I asked would like, etc. About the icons... well... only because people didn't COMPLAIN means every single one of them was perfectly fine with the icons. Most just got used to them so much that they didn't bother to think about improvements. Some however, did.


1) Vol beat me to it, thank you *snickers*

2) Wait a minute... what?
Players still can and do fit the ship how they want to. I'm seeing Procurers and Nereus kill people. But wait, no, those are clearly designed for mining and hauling goods... I must be spreading lies!
Tiericide was important in the case that a player would get something out of a ship sooner, and being able to pick a ship easier based on what they want to do. Remember the old Merlin? to make it really effective, you had to have missile and gunnery skills BOTH up to par. Or think about the Venture. This was a godsent and managed to give left-out frigates finally a distinct reason to exist as their mining bonuses were removed. Sure, some things are weird. For example, why Gallente Command ships need two missile launcher hardpoints. But to call tiericide a complete failure is simply not cutting it.

I also question everyone who says "eve is only for the smart". It should not be hard to learn, it should be hard to master. A game is not difficult because the information how to play better it is hidden deep within the mechanics. That just makes it unnecessarily convoluted.
If anyone needs to feel like a special snowflake because they require high mathematics to actually play the game, then that is their "problem".

10% is more than I anticipated. When I just look at concurrent players, we've lost 1500 people on average, which is less than 10% of the concurrent player counter. Who knows where the true number lies.

The CCP response to this thread is painful.

Let me make this easy for you, CCP:-

[ ] This is a player ship, the bigger the size, the bigger the ship class. A rectangle shape is an industrial ship.

+ This is an NPC, the bigger the size, the bigger the ship class. A red cross is a rat / hostile, white is concord / peaceful.

x This is a drone.

If I want to see the specific type of ship or drone, I look at the name and category in the overview list.

Also:-
Square = Station
Filled circle = Sun
Empty circle = Planet
Empty circle with a side dot = Moon
Empty circle with a side wedge = Stargate
etc.... so, yeah, back to what we had before, and we can all just move on.

You're welcome.

This is definitely not the place to discuss fittings and tiericide, which is why I am not going to reply to you in detail and continue to throw counters to your counters. So of all the things I would like to say, I only pick one, and that is: Osprey is a better logistics ship now than it ever was before, and it was stupid anyway to skill into combat ships if you wanted to get started with mining in the game. The response was the Venture, and what an amazing response it was. Oh and Battle-Venture is not an uncommon sight either.
Other players completely ignore inherent ship bonuses and do something else with it, which means they're also breaking expectations, which is a very interesting element of surprise in pvp. Only because a ship has bonuses to something, doesn't mean it cannot be used for anything else.
So this is largely opinion based and not fact based anyway, and I guess we will agree to disagree in the end. How relevant is your signature anyway these days? c:

Large Collidable Structure brackets do not show in space until clicked on, not particularly helpful. Also large collidable objects have been neglected an icon, while there are 12 different icons for different types of containers.

I agree totally.

It does really appear to me that the quality and vision of the changes has been sharply curtailed.

I've heard Seagull speak about how much they have achieved, but I'm afraid that positive spin is somewhat empty when I consider the amount of things that have been destroyed and the amount of changes that have been botched.

I prefer a small amount of quality work delivered in a reasonable timescale and followed up quickly to deal with any issues, not this rapid fire of mixed quality changes hammered in to a suffering sandbox with inadequate follow up to clean up the inevitable mess.

There have totally been positives in the last year, but that is not the overwhelming memory of what has been for me the darkest time of my EVE playing career.