These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EVE Online: Crucible 1.1 deployment thread

First post
Author
Dmian
Gallenterrorisme
#61 - 2012-01-23 22:08:51 UTC
Sarmatiko wrote:
Tarchus wrote:

Why this awkward change ?
YYYY:DD:MM it's like an american standard. Ugly just like their imperial system. Should i say it's useless, as well ?

YYYY:DD:MM = ISO 8601
Americans have MM:DD:YYYY sequence.

Maybe ISO 8601 was chosen like compromise?

ISO 8601 is [YYYY]-[MM]-[DD], not [YYYY]-[DD]-[MM]
Tarchus
#62 - 2012-01-23 22:18:02 UTC
Hm..
This means it's a typo in the patch notes ?

Hm... Going further, if it's one typo in the patch notes it could be another typo in the patch notes. Or all the notes are a typo. LOL
Sarmatiko
#63 - 2012-01-23 22:31:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarmatiko
Dmian wrote:
ISO 8601 is [YYYY]-[MM]-[DD], not [YYYY]-[DD]-[MM]

Good catch. There is mistake in patch notes.
In the game date format [YYYY]-[MM]-[DD]
http://i.imgur.com/sKs5e.png

Also there is russian localization bug in current SiSi client on character skill page (bug report ID 125976).
Witchking Angmar
Perkele.
#64 - 2012-01-23 22:40:12 UTC
All these UI fixes lately, but you can't seem to fix the item exchange/auction window where you can no longer click on the info icon to find in contracts.
Mioelnir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#65 - 2012-01-23 23:36:37 UTC
Quote:
The Warp Disruption Field Generator II module now works correctly up to its max range as indicated under its attributes.

Thank you.
Good Fellow
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#66 - 2012-01-24 00:29:31 UTC
1) (The one downside of the Fuel Blocks approach is that it's impossible to give faction towers a fuel consumption bonus any more (you can't consume 2/3 of a block). The devs talked to some large-scale starbase operators about this, and they were told that the main bonus of faction towers for them is actually that they last longer between fuel cycles. To try and compensate for the increased running costs, they've taken the above bay size increases and added +25% bay size on top of that for the "tier 1" faction towers, and +50% bay size for the "tier 2" faction towers. )

2) (Faction towers use 10% less fuel for the "tier 1" variety and 20% less fuel for the "tier 2" variety.)

So there is no longer a reduced cost to running faction pos's or is there because in 2 locations it says different things.

There is also no mention of what happens to starbase charters for high sec pos's.


Cordo Draken
ABOS Industrial Enterprises
#67 - 2012-01-24 02:01:47 UTC
BeanBagKing wrote:
Quote:
All Assault Ships now have a new Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty

I still think an afterburner bonus of some kind would have been much better.

Can't wait for 1.1 :)


Agreed. These aren't interceptors... The majority of AFs are fit with ABs, so WTH? AFs should be Elite Dogfighters not kitters, plus their cap doesn't exactly scream MWD, not for me anyway. The Role Bonus should encompass the definition of "Assualt" Frigate. As with this bonus, it screams "runaway" frigate.

I will say, I do like the majority of the 4th bonuses and added slot locations. Jury is still out on some that I care to fly, but overall I like the added Love to AFs!

Whomever said, "You only get one shot to make a good impression," was utterly wrong. I've made plenty of great impressions with my Autocannons 

Stridsflygplan
Krypted Gaming
#68 - 2012-01-24 02:10:36 UTC
All Assault Ships now have a new Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty...

WTF why did you have to make all assault ships, interceptor wanna bes. There should be a bigger gap betwin the ship roles.

A 50% bonus to afterburner speed would have been so much better.

Assault ships role should be more of heavy tackling compared to interceptors. with good tanks and good damage. Sure they still have that but they will still take extra damage from the increased sig rad and will still be too slow with afterburners fitted.

Change it or give them a double role bonus:

All Assault Ships now have a new Role Bonus: 50% bonus to afterburner speed and 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty.

Otherwise a really good job CCP! keep it up Pirate
Rasz Lin
#69 - 2012-01-24 02:26:47 UTC
Witchking Angmar wrote:
All these UI fixes lately, but you can't seem to fix the item exchange/auction window where you can no longer click on the info icon to find in contracts.



+1
Miss President
SOLARIS ASTERIUS
#70 - 2012-01-24 02:28:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Miss President
Overall good improvements CCP.

One thing I have reservations about is giving bonus to expanded scan probe launchers

I've been doing exploration since old scan engine, and you've came and destroyed a highly specialized skill set extremely dependent on skills and simplified it. Ok, so you made it more interactive and easier to use for average Joe .

Then you changed the scanning engine, that a pretty much noob can do it. But why boost the bonus now?

Previously skilled players will benefit, but those who haven't invested same skills and implants get a free boost at scanning??
Really, training scanning skills to level 4 is not such a big deal so that an average Joe could work on an interactive and simple and scanning engine.

I think this change should not be made. I do not understand what kind of complaints lead you guys to improve this bonus? Just give the faction one faster probe launch rate and be done with it. I think more people will appreciate it better. (Tech II can improve probe launch rate as well)

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#71 - 2012-01-24 04:15:09 UTC
Good Fellow wrote:
1) (The one downside of the Fuel Blocks approach is that it's impossible to give faction towers a fuel consumption bonus any more (you can't consume 2/3 of a block). The devs talked to some large-scale starbase operators about this, and they were told that the main bonus of faction towers for them is actually that they last longer between fuel cycles. To try and compensate for the increased running costs, they've taken the above bay size increases and added +25% bay size on top of that for the "tier 1" faction towers, and +50% bay size for the "tier 2" faction towers. )

2) (Faction towers use 10% less fuel for the "tier 1" variety and 20% less fuel for the "tier 2" variety.)

So there is no longer a reduced cost to running faction pos's or is there because in 2 locations it says different things.

There is also no mention of what happens to starbase charters for high sec pos's.



The first was when the BPCs were to make 4 blocks/run (and a Large tower ate 4/hr). They now make 40 (and a large tower eats 40). They added the 0 so that Faction POSes work and Sov works on smaller POSes.

Charters are unchanged.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#72 - 2012-01-24 04:17:13 UTC
CCP wrote:

Windows from Crucible 1.0.4 to Crucible 1.1 is 31 MB
Windows full client 5 GB
Mac from Crucible 1.0.4 to Crucible 1.1 is 37 MB
Mac full client 5.9 GB


Why these hurtful lies? I've never seen an Eve installation run less than 10gb. Why the disparity?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

Kumq uat
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2012-01-24 05:42:58 UTC
Dear Kumquat,

We at CEE CEE PEE have noticed you like to run around in assault ships with afterburners and halo implants. Instead we are going to make it have a MWD bonus just to **** you off. Also good luck hitting with your blasters and keeping cap stable.

Regards,
CEE CEE PEE
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
#74 - 2012-01-24 06:26:32 UTC
How dare you reduce the quality of my High Quality Screenshots! I WANT uncompressed bitmaps.

i will forgive you for not black ops buff this item since you had your handful with the assault frigates but i expect it next major patch

i do not aprove the ammo name change for missiles. i am gona have to learn a whole new system >_<


Finally work on collision with accell gates. lets hope it works

Thank god for the watch list changes. much love there
Katowen
#75 - 2012-01-24 07:32:53 UTC
Tarchus wrote:
Deitis Surtic wrote:
Divine Eternity wrote:
Quote:
Improved readability of the skill queue finishing time text in the Training Queue window. It will now read "Completes on YYYY.DD.MM at HH:MM


What type of date format is that? Why don't you stick to ISO if you have an international game? I really recommend you to check the different standards for calendar dates, for beginners this is sufficient:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calendar_date


+1

CCP: If you're going to make up your own confusing date standards, at least do it with style. I personally suggest YDMD.MY.YY!



+2

Why this awkward change ?
YYYY:DD:MM it's like an american standard. Ugly just like their imperial system. Should i say it's useless, as well ?

1. Why this format ? It's that practical ? It's that easy to read and comprehend ?

2. DD:MM:YYYY It's the way to go. YYYY should be on last place because it doesn't change so often like DD or MM.
And not to add that this awful change will send all people who didn't read the patch notes into haze.

This change have to be the stupidest change from the new CCP.


If CCP *really* cared about our opinions and wanted us to be happy with changes like this, they would ALLOW us to select our OWN date/time displays in the options to be used anywhere from the common ISO standards available. That way, no matter what country you are in, you can pick a format that suites you the best. This is just LAZY programming from CCP.

Just like the new font...They were too LAZY to allow us to keep the old, use new or some other fonts....


Katowen

Tarchus
#76 - 2012-01-24 07:53:04 UTC
Katowen, the explanation it's very simple:
We are allowed to be free only within the boundaries set by CCP.
This the truth, even if we dont like it. I understood this and it makes me very sad.
Or, if you want another analogy: playing a mmorpg it's like living in a communist country: you do as you are told and you dont question leaders' decisions.
Specialist Shardani
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#77 - 2012-01-24 09:22:28 UTC
ORCACommander wrote:
How dare you reduce the quality of my High Quality Screenshots! I WANT uncompressed bitmaps.


Ever heard of lossless compression? PNG is a superior format to BMP in every way.


Katowen wrote:
Just like the new font...They were too LAZY to allow us to keep the old, use new or some other fonts....


ORLY? Go ahead, you design an international font that supports several RADICALLY different character sets and let me know how it went. Also, readability improved by leaps and bounds with the new font and that's not an opinion, it's fact.
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#78 - 2012-01-24 09:25:18 UTC
Changes look awesome overall.

I mislike the skill thing though. New players may want to see their current skill all the time because it changes often. Older players who train skills that take weeks or months don't want to see all the time that they'll finish their skill in two months... they *know* that. Besides, every serious player uses EVEmon. So I hope that part of the UI is optional but it doesn't sound like it is.

.

Ancy Denaries
Frontier Venture
#79 - 2012-01-24 10:06:23 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
CCP wrote:

Windows from Crucible 1.0.4 to Crucible 1.1 is 31 MB
Windows full client 5 GB
Mac from Crucible 1.0.4 to Crucible 1.1 is 37 MB
Mac full client 5.9 GB


Why these hurtful lies? I've never seen an Eve installation run less than 10gb. Why the disparity?

Gnn, ignorance! It's download size, not completed install size.

"Shoot at anything that moves. If it doesn't move, shoot it anyway, it might move later."

"Do not be too positive. The light at the end of the tunnel could be a train." - Franz Kafka

Mnengli Noiliffe
Doomheim
#80 - 2012-01-24 10:28:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Mnengli Noiliffe
Actually, pre-patch, ISO 8601 way, YYYY:MM:DD is the best since it retains date order after being sorted by simple algorithm that only looks at character codes. Very handy for naming files and directories or any other items that are likely to be sorted by name.

YYYY:DD:MM is the abomination with no sense or purpose. Is this some kind of local Icelandic tradition to write dates like that? Because European is DD:MM:YYYY and American is MM:DD:YYYY as far as i know.