These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev Blog: Happy Safe Fun Time!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#221 - 2012-11-28 09:07:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Poetic Stanziel
Eugene Kerner wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
SERIOUSLY WHO THE HELL THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA?
Greyscale.

This game has persistence in the majority of its features. Default orbit. Most of the UI. The configuration of our modules on the HUD. Etc. Etc. Etc. Persistence between login sessions is a default bit of design in nearly every feature CCP adds to this game, where persistence is applicable.

Nobody can reasonably argue that persistence is not applicable where the safety is concerned. People are flat-out gobsmacked that it was left out of the design, because it's common sense that it would be persistent. Which suggests that leaving it out was a conscious design decision, not some oversight, or something left out due to lack of time.

To maintain persistence here is the easiest thing in the world (hyperbolic, but you get the point.) Load safety setting at login. Save safety setting at logoff. That's it. Carbon probably has an API call for saving settings.

This is a Greyscale initiative. And he wants to see if player whining on the issue dies down after a few weeks of it being in play. I think one thing we've all learned about Greyscale is that he really does not like PvP, and most of his design ideas reveal that as bright as day.

(Notice in a quote above, when answering about persistence, Greyscale not only states he can't say when it will be fixed, he states he can't say IF it will be fixed.)


Well what does it really change?
PvP opportunities will be lost. You try to lock someone up, only to realize that you forgot to reset your safety back to red. By the time you correct that, the target has warped off.
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#222 - 2012-11-28 09:07:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Terrorfrodo
I like the changes. As a very occasional low sec pirate, it will be great that I can disable safety now before going there. It makes the system more transparent for newbies and is also helpful to veteran players who are not full-time criminals, so it's really win-win.

The safe logoff is not that useful in practice, because if you log out in a long warp it will still actually be safer than sittting still and watching the timer run out. The main improvement here is that we can now see at a glance whether all our timers have expired.

edit: But yes, the safety setting has to be peristent. Can't be hard. The UI team tries to make every possible inventory window persistent, and mostly succeeds, and you cannot make a simple setting persistent? Not very credible.

.
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#223 - 2012-11-28 09:11:04 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Eugene Kerner wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
SERIOUSLY WHO THE HELL THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA?
Greyscale.

This game has persistence in the majority of its features. Default orbit. Most of the UI. The configuration of our modules on the HUD. Etc. Etc. Etc. Persistence between login sessions is a default bit of design in nearly every feature CCP adds to this game, where persistence is applicable.

Nobody can reasonably argue that persistence is not applicable where the safety is concerned. People are flat-out gobsmacked that it was left out of the design, because it's common sense that it would be persistent. Which suggests that leaving it out was a conscious design decision, not some oversight, or something left out due to lack of time.

To maintain persistence here is the easiest thing in the world (hyperbolic, but you get the point.) Load safety setting at login. Save safety setting at logoff. That's it. Carbon probably has an API call for saving settings.

This is a Greyscale initiative. And he wants to see if player whining on the issue dies down after a few weeks of it being in play. I think one thing we've all learned about Greyscale is that he really does not like PvP, and most of his design ideas reveal that as bright as day.

(Notice in a quote above, when answering about persistence, Greyscale not only states he can't say when it will be fixed, he states he can't say IF it will be fixed.)


Well what does it really change?
PvP opportunities will be lost. You try to lock someone up, only to realize that you forgot to reset your safety back to red. By the time to correct that, the target has warped off.

Ah ok I read what you mean now....

Greyscale...thats just a little change in the code...Do it please...I mean its possible to save every other little UI detail so if you do not implement it you simply do not want it.
If we have to change that every single time than it is just like the infamous popup window we have now...

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP
Onyx Nyx
The Veldspar Protectorate
#224 - 2012-11-28 09:17:29 UTC
Eugene Kerner wrote:
Onyx Nyx wrote:
Bah.. silly youngins. Back in my day, you lived with the consequences of your actions.


In Soviet Russia consequences live with you.


As it should be, to be fair. And it would honestly not surprise me if Greyscale had pushed this button concept of his so far that it essentially was a button to whether you wanted to be safe or be flagged for PVP, but luckily it stays at being a feature for the mentally impaired and it lets me shoot at mentally impaired people.

I kill kittens, and puppies and bunnies. I maim toddlers and teens and then more.

  • Richard (http://www.lfgcomic.com/)
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#225 - 2012-11-28 09:21:42 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Eugene Kerner wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
SERIOUSLY WHO THE HELL THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA?
Greyscale.

This game has persistence in the majority of its features. Default orbit. Most of the UI. The configuration of our modules on the HUD. Etc. Etc. Etc. Persistence between login sessions is a default bit of design in nearly every feature CCP adds to this game, where persistence is applicable.

Nobody can reasonably argue that persistence is not applicable where the safety is concerned. People are flat-out gobsmacked that it was left out of the design, because it's common sense that it would be persistent. Which suggests that leaving it out was a conscious design decision, not some oversight, or something left out due to lack of time.

To maintain persistence here is the easiest thing in the world (hyperbolic, but you get the point.) Load safety setting at login. Save safety setting at logoff. That's it. Carbon probably has an API call for saving settings.

This is a Greyscale initiative. And he wants to see if player whining on the issue dies down after a few weeks of it being in play. I think one thing we've all learned about Greyscale is that he really does not like PvP, and most of his design ideas reveal that as bright as day.

(Notice in a quote above, when answering about persistence, Greyscale not only states he can't say when it will be fixed, he states he can't say IF it will be fixed.)


Well what does it really change?
PvP opportunities will be lost. You try to lock someone up, only to realize that you forgot to reset your safety back to red. By the time to correct that, the target has warped off.

Another question is if we have to switch the safty out after every session chqange (dock at station, jump through gate....)

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#226 - 2012-11-28 09:26:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Poetic Stanziel
Eugene Kerner wrote:
Another question is if we have to switch the safty out after every session chqange (dock at station, jump through gate....)
Only at login. Clarified previously in this thread.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#227 - 2012-11-28 09:27:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Poetic Stanziel
Terrorfrodo wrote:
But yes, the safety setting has to be peristent. Can't be hard. The UI team tries to make every possible inventory window persistent, and mostly succeeds, and you cannot make a simple setting persistent? Not very credible.
This.

Because it needs to be repeated over and over again.
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
Shadow Cartel
#228 - 2012-11-28 09:30:06 UTC
If u dont make the safety button persistent, dont deliver pls.

BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
Onyx Nyx
The Veldspar Protectorate
#229 - 2012-11-28 09:33:10 UTC
I think this should only really apply to new characters as well, as you force new characters regardless of account age into the rookie channel. Let me be the one that decides if I want this feature or not.

I kill kittens, and puppies and bunnies. I maim toddlers and teens and then more.

  • Richard (http://www.lfgcomic.com/)
Baki Yuku
Doomheim
#230 - 2012-11-28 09:39:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Baki Yuku
wow how are these features even remotely useful wow one development cycle wasted yet again. oh and that **** not only is it useless its ugly as ****. Design standards 2012 seem to be lost on ccp.

How about addressing memory leaks in the client, ability to switch characters on same account without having to ******* restart the client every time.. there are tons of things that ccp could fix or improve one instead we get this wow.. just wow
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#231 - 2012-11-28 09:52:21 UTC
Not a fan of this at all. Had it been something restricted to characters up to 30-60 days old as a learning tool for new pilots, it could have had value, but without that, it's just something that removes even more decision making from the game. The choice not even being persistent and defaulting to green is all kinds of screwed up as well. Then there's finally giving people a way to remove those annoying popups in highsec/lowsec, but instead of just making it a toggle in settings or adding a 'never show this again' checkbox, they build it into this mess.

Pretty lame, to say the least.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Sinzor Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#232 - 2012-11-28 09:57:36 UTC
When exactly do you disappear from local during safe logoff? Is there a way to know that some player is currently safe-logoffing?
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#233 - 2012-11-28 10:09:48 UTC
One small difference with the persistence of most of the other settings, and of this one.

The safety level isn't just on your client. It's also on the server. So it's a /trifle/ more difficult to do than persisting where a window is.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
87102-6
Doomheim
#234 - 2012-11-28 10:20:34 UTC
87102-6 wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
87102-6 wrote:
Regarding the "Safety Button" (the green dot): someone didn't think this through, as it conflicts with "Show Readout". Because I couldn't find any present-day screenshots on Google Images showing what the readout looks like presently, here you go:

http://postimage.org/image/pqxcktnp3/


You can quite clearly see tht the safety interlock sits comfortably between the cap/shield display and the readout numbers. The only issue will be the connecting lines, assuming that part of the UI has not been tweaked as well.


I agree with the latter part (the lines almost certainly will conflict), but I'm not sure about the former. I will need to bust out Photoshop or Paint.NET and overlay the two images with some layering adjustments to get pixel precision and see for myself. I'll post the results when I have them (I know how to do it, it's just an issue of time).


And here it is -- just a simple Photoshop edit (you can tell from the messed up capacitor grid at the top):

http://postimage.org/image/n8lj4jb6z/

So the "safety interlock" (green dot button) will indeed block the Readout lines. Not sure how CCP wants to solve that; my recommendation would be to move the button to the lower left of the main grid area (i.e. "sort of" between the Autopilot button and the Stop-Ship button, but a little further down as to not get in the way).
Galmas
United System's Commonwealth
#235 - 2012-11-28 10:25:22 UTC
Now thats a difficult topic.

I think it is in general a good idea to not annoy the s... out of new players by getting them killed by a pretty complex piece of internet space ships game when they start playing and fool around in high sec, sticking their nose into everything and everyone.

I think this has the potential to make more new players actually keep playing. In some way it also outlines that you can also do "bad things" in New Eden which could possibly make your new life a fair bit more exiting than just running missions.


One thing i right away really like about all this:

"On the other hand, if you're out to cause trouble, you'll never be bothered by last-minute pop-ups again..."

I have missed more than one tackle because of this in the past.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#236 - 2012-11-28 10:29:05 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
On persisting the safety button setting: it's something we were hoping to get into this release but didn't quite have time. I can't give any kind of estimate on if/when it will happen right now because we're in the final stages of release prep and our team is focusing on Retribution launch rather than anything else. Once we've shipped and tidied up after ourselves, we'll look at what we're working on next Smile


I usually am excited about any kind of more user friendly UI changes you do but this is seriously... I don't even... You refactored/redesigned whole frekking Crimewatch, targets, camera following selected object, rebalanced dozens of ships and weapons and modules and you didn't have time to save 1 frekking boolean value and make safety switch persistent? Wow, just wow...

Invalid signature format
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#237 - 2012-11-28 10:33:12 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
and you didn't have time to save 1 frekking boolean value and make safety switch persistent? Wow, just wow...


To be fair, it's not a boolean because it has three possible states. Surely this adds vastly to the complexity of the task Blink

.
MainDrain
Applied Anarchy
The Initiative.
#238 - 2012-11-28 10:34:19 UTC
Too many posts, struggling to find the answer to my quick questions

Scenario 1;

Im a high sec mission runner, im undocking and warping to the site to shoot NPCs. Do i need to set my safety to at least YELLOW to allow me to fire at the mission NPCs (as this generates a suspect flag)

Scenario 2;

Im a high sec incursion runner, im in a site. As they are concord sanctioned hostiles do i need to have my safety set to at least YELLOW to allow me to fire at Sansha.

As a general rule im very happy with this change, i was a victim of the typical can baiting as a new player when i first started, however as the new players will be killing NPC rats they will likely have their safeties set to yellow at least. This will not prevent them opening a can baiters can as this only generates a suspect flag (from memory)

Can i anyone say 100% the answers to the above
K1netic
Doomheim
#239 - 2012-11-28 10:35:12 UTC
I think the change is great. much better than these popups you couldn't really disable unless you wanted to get CONCORDOKKEN after a misclick.

now if it was persistent it would be perfect.

all these bittervets sperging about nanny state are sad. it's not much different than what it is now. it's not like there wasn't a safety before, just that it sucked.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#240 - 2012-11-28 10:46:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Schmata Bastanold
Terrorfrodo wrote:
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
and you didn't have time to save 1 frekking boolean value and make safety switch persistent? Wow, just wow...


To be fair, it's not a boolean because it has three possible states. Surely this adds vastly to the complexity of the task Blink


Good catch, in my mind it has only two states: disabled and state-I-don't-care-about, but you are right. Still it is 1 frekking value to store and read and they are going "when/IF" about it. Yeah, because carebears will have it better with default being "full safe" setting and I may change my mind between sessions and want to fly peacefully at weekends.

Invalid signature format