These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Industry Teams - Current Plans

First post First post
Author
Dangeresque Too
Pistols for Pandas
#201 - 2015-02-14 23:07:34 UTC
I like the near complete lack of dev responses outside of what, a single post saying "we are doing this cause Reasons".

They say they were being removed because of issues (most of which were present during testing and ignored, as per CCP's usual testing and feedback policy one can presume) as well as due to lack of use.

But what CCP never comes out to say, did they try to find out why they weren't being used? Seems that should have been a first step in this process, to find out why people weren't using teams. But in none of these posts/blogs/threads did they ever say they found out why people weren't using them.

They should have found out why people weren't using them and then made appropriate tweaks while the code was still fresh in developers minds. Did the change improve frequency of use, yes/no? Ok, try making more of change or change something else, etc etc.

"CCP Fozzie expressed that the desire was to make it easier to use the current system so that they can get more targeted feedback for any actual changes the underling system needs." - I believe that was direct at ship skins in the CSM minutes.

Sounds like something they should have applied to Teams as well. You know, inform people about them and make them easier to understand and interact with so that actual and more directly helpful feedback for the core feature itself can be gathered. Instead of just tossing them up as a new tab on a freshly redesigned window with very little information about how to use them.

How about they apply this type of development style to CQ, it didn't get the response they wanted, hasn't been improved, so why not just remove that feature entirely as well?

Further, they never updated their plan for fixing the things that they broke when they put teams in with the promise of more teams to fix them? Like T2 invention among others... Teams were supposed to fix what they admitted to breaking with Invention, so now that teams won't be fixing that, what will?
Milla Goodpussy
Garoun Investment Bank
#202 - 2015-02-19 19:10:53 UTC
Dangeresque Too wrote:
I like the near complete lack of dev responses outside of what, a single post saying "we are doing this cause Reasons".

They say they were being removed because of issues (most of which were present during testing and ignored, as per CCP's usual testing and feedback policy one can presume) as well as due to lack of use.

But what CCP never comes out to say, did they try to find out why they weren't being used? Seems that should have been a first step in this process, to find out why people weren't using teams. But in none of these posts/blogs/threads did they ever say they found out why people weren't using them.

They should have found out why people weren't using them and then made appropriate tweaks while the code was still fresh in developers minds. Did the change improve frequency of use, yes/no? Ok, try making more of change or change something else, etc etc.

"CCP Fozzie expressed that the desire was to make it easier to use the current system so that they can get more targeted feedback for any actual changes the underling system needs." - I believe that was direct at ship skins in the CSM minutes.

Sounds like something they should have applied to Teams as well. You know, inform people about them and make them easier to understand and interact with so that actual and more directly helpful feedback for the core feature itself can be gathered. Instead of just tossing them up as a new tab on a freshly redesigned window with very little information about how to use them.

How about they apply this type of development style to CQ, it didn't get the response they wanted, hasn't been improved, so why not just remove that feature entirely as well?

Further, they never updated their plan for fixing the things that they broke when they put teams in with the promise of more teams to fix them? Like T2 invention among others... Teams were supposed to fix what they admitted to breaking with Invention, so now that teams won't be fixing that, what will?


***CRICKETS*************

Greyscale's Ghost is laughing his behind off at us right now.
Calvin Broadus
Georgia Department of Transportation
#203 - 2015-02-21 14:10:38 UTC
too many half-arsed features already.

why they keep adding the new stuff instead of just fixing what aint been fixed, needed fixing, for so ruddy long.

walking in stations, anyone?

first-person cockpit view?

corp interface?

alliance pos access?

give me back my drones.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#204 - 2015-02-21 18:16:41 UTC
Calvin Broadus wrote:
too many half-arsed features already.

why they keep adding the new stuff instead of just fixing what aint been fixed, needed fixing, for so ruddy long.

walking in stations, anyone?

first-person cockpit view?

corp interface?

alliance pos access?

give me back my drones.



You know that the corp interface is being updated, right?

And that you're not in a cockpit, but in a hydrostatic pod?

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Jon Dekker
Dekker Corporation
#205 - 2015-02-21 21:13:01 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Calvin Broadus wrote:
too many half-arsed features already.

why they keep adding the new stuff instead of just fixing what aint been fixed, needed fixing, for so ruddy long.

walking in stations, anyone?

first-person cockpit view?

corp interface?

alliance pos access?

give me back my drones.



You know that the corp interface is being updated, right?

And that you're not in a cockpit, but in a hydrostatic pod?


I'd love to be able to walk around a ship and explore, or chat with NPC crew members, but I doubt CCP would be willing to spend the $100k plus it would take to implement that.

Still though, being stuck in a hydrostatic pod seems a bit lame considering Dust & Valkyrie get to walk around like normal people. It might be cool to see your avatar change into a pod suit and climb into it when you exit the station, and then the pod can be transferred to your ship (you can of course skip this sequence, or disable it entirely), and a "inside pod" view were possible, where it shows you a HUD with controls and a wide angle view of your surroundings as if you were inside a cockpit. That would be sick.

Same goes for docking animations and transitions - I really think that CCP should look into adding those. Modular hangars too, where you can walk around, and see all of your ships lined up in actual size. Tech bots working, and other NPC techs doing stuff.

Not only would this give some life, but would also reduce server load when people are watching cutscenes, because while many might skip the scene, I'm sure that many still would watch them each time.

Adding camera angles to switch between (think Grand Theft Auto, with a cinematic camera) would be awesome.

I can't wait to see what they do with the dynamic loading, when they don't need to bundle everything up with the client, and it's all loaded on-demand. It will really open up the content that they can include I think.

Yes, I know Andi said that WIS was off the table, but I think they should still work on it secretly, and when a foundation is ready, launch it, and then iterate on it adding more things in each release.
Jon Dekker
Dekker Corporation
#206 - 2015-02-21 21:20:48 UTC
Whoops, sorry I realized after I posted the above that this thread is actually discussing industry teams. My bad! :)
Ydnari
Estrale Frontiers
#207 - 2015-02-26 22:42:46 UTC
Why is this even still a sticky since they were just removed anyway?

--

Hakan MacTrew
MUTED VOID
#208 - 2015-02-27 09:43:07 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Calvin Broadus wrote:
too many half-arsed features already.

why they keep adding the new stuff instead of just fixing what aint been fixed, needed fixing, for so ruddy long.

walking in stations, anyone?

first-person cockpit view?

corp interface?

alliance pos access?

give me back my drones.



You know that the corp interface is being updated, right?

And that you're not in a cockpit, but in a hydrostatic pod?


Also, given the scale of the ships we fly, the majority of said ships would have a Bridge, not a cockpit - and probably do because there are still some crew in many ships, even with a capsuleer in command.
Calvin Broadus
Georgia Department of Transportation
#209 - 2015-03-19 00:06:43 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Calvin Broadus wrote:
too many half-arsed features already.

why they keep adding the new stuff instead of just fixing what aint been fixed, needed fixing, for so ruddy long.

walking in stations, anyone?

first-person cockpit view?

corp interface?

alliance pos access?

give me back my drones.



You know that the corp interface is being updated, right?

And that you're not in a cockpit, but in a hydrostatic pod?


It's always being updated. Nothing really gets fixed.

And why, at this point, can I not allow alliance members to use my pos labs and factories?

Pod, bridge, whatever. Give me a forward view from a cockpit or center bridge position. Let me FLY the ship, not this lame steering thing they added.
miguel Manjarrez
#210 - 2015-03-22 23:09:02 UTC
Allow work Teams to be available to the industrialist that has a need for them . Taking them out is taking an aspect of the game that is an interesting game part. That needs some polish to make it alluring to the Eve community. They only need a few things that might make players take a second look. If not allow them to be sold to the players that have use for them. Thank you.
miguel Manjarrez
#211 - 2015-03-23 04:10:31 UTC
With maintaining the aspect of work teams in EVE allow work teams to be like a player made items or bought at the EVE game markets or the Eve store. Allow the Player base market to prove or disprove of Work Teams in the EVE world. Work Teams have a place in EVE the idea and potential of Work Teams is their. Work Teams it is an aspect of the game that adds and does not take from EVE.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#212 - 2015-03-26 19:16:21 UTC
I hate to do it.... must... resist... can't aARGHH!!!


I TOLD YOU SO I TOLD YOU SO I TOLD YOU SO

More needless complexity dies a dark cold death.

*heavy breeathing*

Ahem. Sorry.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Destiny Dain2
Your Destiny Corporation
#213 - 2015-03-29 22:08:15 UTC
If you ever bring back the Teams feature, you should have where a drop down list from the inject slot with preset bonuses available from any industry service.

Bonuses should contain only increase to either time or material savings at the cost of the other and not to a percentage in isk. So if a corp. is running out of something or a inflated market price you can do some quick runs at the cost of a few more materials. But, if you have all the time in the world you can increase your profit margin by saving a few materials. A system like this is simple and straight forward which will result in a feature that everyone will use.
EMT Holding
EMT Holding Corporation
#214 - 2015-04-25 14:06:08 UTC
Something tells me we're never going to see the return or iteration of this. Those who do mass industry in a single system will continue to be punished with harsh install costs.
Zifrian
The Pannion Domin
#215 - 2015-05-03 20:44:42 UTC
I'd just like to know what is going to happen with this for sure. I'd like to remove my team logic or keep it in IPH but this "we are going to revisit teams" isn't helpful to me. I have a feeling it's never coming back so can you just make that call now for us? Even if it's not going to be something done in two years from now that'd be nice to know.

Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!

Import CCP's SDE - EVE SDE Database Builder

Destiny Dain2
Your Destiny Corporation
#216 - 2015-05-09 23:54:01 UTC
I was not really into industry at the time of Teams. But, here is why I never used them.

1.) It was confusing. Do I have to build there to be able to use them or was it a consumable that I had to pick up and bring back to my station to use? Whatever, no point because of the next reason.

2.) Profit margins are tight and if you are not aware of the numbers you can lose money, now you have a team asking for 5-10%. Unless your building larger items, it would be foolish to use them.

Make it a special decryptor that has bonuses to manufacturing that you redeem in the teams tab at any facility. I would use decryptors, maybe.

Just keep it basic. This is one of those cases where "more is less".
Chichax
Thor's Hammer Incorporated
#217 - 2015-05-14 00:01:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Chichax
My reasons for not using teams was not the teams itself, but the amount of red tape required to get one.

1. There was zero feedback from the client that an auction was about to close. Notification support for industry in general is poor.
2. The amount of applicable teams were very small. At any one time there was about 5 worthy teams and of those 3 were closing out side my timezone. The others were either very expensive or closing severals days later and with the UI forgotten.
3. The UI also failed to notify that a usable team was available so sometimes I just forgot the the system had one cabable for the job.

I truly feel that with some UI updates and quantity updates the system would have worked much more like intended. Also now there is more harm working along your corpmates as there is no collecting force to offset the industry index tax.

Second request
Could we please have both the production and research slots number show at the same time. With maybe hilighting the type currently selected (to help newbies). I hate to have to click something else just to see what my current slot use is.