EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New Dev Blog: My OCD said fix this so I did...

First post
Author
#61 - 2012-07-16 15:57:43 UTC
Why??? Why??? Why CCP so much loving That_strange_very_very_long_names_for_every_thing_in_the_game?
Why you think "Auto-targeting" is better than "FoF"???
#62 - 2012-07-16 15:59:25 UTC
Lord Helghast wrote:
CCP FoxFour wrote:
ORCACommander wrote:
STOP RENAMING STUFF!. what was wrong with it being called Friend or Foe? jesus christ does everything have to be dumbed down and made ambiguous? it used to be if you named something by just scourged you just told the person what sized missile and what type of damage, now it could be a any of a dozen missiles. HAMS need to stay hams because they were the counterpart to heavy missiles.

on the plus side the implants did need a massive reorganization and thank you for that.


You're welcome. :)


Well technically friend or foe, wasn't always a fat lol, trust me i had a FOF at one day way back when i started that hit a friend in highsec got concorded was quite funny, but ya it shoots foes or friends, so auto-targeting seems wiser, especially since the launchers are already changed.

lol ouch i guess they should have gone with FAF: Fire and Forget
Goonswarm Federation
#63 - 2012-07-16 16:14:35 UTC
I think you just made up yout #tweetfleet graph
http://analytics.topsy.com/?q=%23tweetfleet
Vae. Victis.
#64 - 2012-07-16 16:17:21 UTC
I for one don't mind long, fluffy names - and I like my delicious HAM Drake much better than a flavorless AM Drake. Cool stuff!
#65 - 2012-07-16 16:31:47 UTC
Illectroculus Defined wrote:
I think you just made up yout #tweetfleet graph
http://analytics.topsy.com/?q=%23tweetfleet


No, the chart is supposed to show discussions of "graphs" on #tweetfleet over time, not use of #tweetfleet over time.

Also, the pedantic computer scientist in me cringes at the conflation of "chart" and "graph", but otherwise nice changes!
C C P Alliance
#66 - 2012-07-16 16:33:30 UTC
Gnaw LF wrote:
CCP FoxFour wrote:
FIRST! BWAHAHAHAHA! First on my first dev blog! SO MUCH FUN! :D



Hi CCP FoxFour, welcome to CCP and the greater EvE community. Hope you like your new job and wish you long years and tons of fun doing it. Also, thank you for fixing all the inconsistent missile names, those really should not have been left behind. As for renaming the F.O.F missiles to Auto Targeting, I do understand that the naming convention would make things easier for new players but I do hope you will remember us bitter old Killboard admins who have to put up with broken killmails for weeks before a DB update is pushed out. Now, the F.O.F missiles are rarely used so its no big deal but any time a popular item undergoes a name change a lot of KB admins begin to cry. So next time please think of that under-appreciated group. Thanks.

@CCP_FoxFour // Technical Designer // Team Tech Co

Third-party developer? Check out the official developers site for dev blogs, resources, and more.

Goonswarm Federation
#67 - 2012-07-16 16:34:28 UTC
Casiella Truza wrote:
Illectroculus Defined wrote:
I think you just made up yout #tweetfleet graph
http://analytics.topsy.com/?q=%23tweetfleet


No, the chart is supposed to show discussions of "graphs" on #tweetfleet over time, not use of #tweetfleet over time.

Also, the pedantic computer scientist in me cringes at the conflation of "chart" and "graph", but otherwise nice changes!


We can do that too:
http://analytics.topsy.com/?q=%23tweetfleet%20graph
C C P Alliance
#68 - 2012-07-16 16:34:37 UTC
Illectroculus Defined wrote:
I think you just made up yout #tweetfleet graph
http://analytics.topsy.com/?q=%23tweetfleet


:( Please don't be mad. I just wanted to be part of the cool kids group.

@CCP_FoxFour // Technical Designer // Team Tech Co

Third-party developer? Check out the official developers site for dev blogs, resources, and more.

Team Amarrica
#69 - 2012-07-16 16:50:52 UTC
Are the genolution CA-1 and CA-2 being seeded now? Or are they still rare gift items from a while ago?
#70 - 2012-07-16 16:53:36 UTC
Dear mr foxfour.

Can i direkt your OCD at the longlived bug of the build quote window in manufacturing. The long ignored bug of rounding up r.a.m. - tools with blueprints that require them.

It's indisputable that there is a rounding bug and it its very noticeable the lower the procentage usage of the r.a.m. - tools gets and the more runs.

5 years and counting with this bug, Build window will not allow you to press build until amount of r.a.m. - tools = amount of build runs due to r.a.m. - usage procentage gets convertet from procentage to a integer and then rounded. and it always get rounded up to 1.

The result is that a build of 100 runs/units of X-something that requires 50% of r.a.m.- tool one whould require 50 of r.a.m.-tool but build quota window wont accept 50 r.a.m.- tool it will only accept when 100 r.a.m.- tool is there and once build is press it only removes 50 r.a.m.- tool and there is 50 r.a.m.- tool left.

please fix this and i will love you long time.
Amarr Empire
#71 - 2012-07-16 16:54:53 UTC
Second best devblog graph ever! \o/
C C P Alliance
#72 - 2012-07-16 16:55:47 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Are the genolution CA-1 and CA-2 being seeded now? Or are they still rare gift items from a while ago?


Still a rare item that we are not seeding. :)

@CCP_FoxFour // Technical Designer // Team Tech Co

Third-party developer? Check out the official developers site for dev blogs, resources, and more.

#73 - 2012-07-16 16:57:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Haifisch Zahne
Probably already said, so I will say it again.

While the changes to the Implants are welcome *when* choosing the most important implants you want to use, the old system is more useful to find implants to fill "holes". For example, there aren't advantageous, or perhaps any, missile implants for every slot. So, now one has to find an implant *for that slot*. One might have secondary implant categories in mind, but it would be useful to have *both* ways to see implants.

"Cut off one's nose to spite one's face" seems to be CCP's motto.
C C P Alliance
#74 - 2012-07-16 16:59:09 UTC
St Mio wrote:
Second best devblog graph ever! \o/


What one is number one? I need to know what the bar is set at so I can beat it.

@CCP_FoxFour // Technical Designer // Team Tech Co

Third-party developer? Check out the official developers site for dev blogs, resources, and more.

#75 - 2012-07-16 17:06:00 UTC
Wenron wrote:

Dampening = getting something wet. (unless a SD is some sort of zero-G space watergun that aims for sensor arrays, I don't think this is what you mean the module to be named).


There is only one man who would dare give me the Raspberry!

95% of the players are loving EVE, the other 5%? On the forums.

#76 - 2012-07-16 17:22:07 UTC
So mr Foxfour.

Any success at directing your attention/OCD at the build quota window?.
verification of it shouldnt take more than a couple of minuttes?.
C C P Alliance
#77 - 2012-07-16 17:25:23 UTC
MR rockafella wrote:
So mr Foxfour.

Any success at directing your attention/OCD at the build quota window?.
verification of it shouldnt take more than a couple of minuttes?.


Unfortunately that is not my area so I cannot comment on it. :(

@CCP_FoxFour // Technical Designer // Team Tech Co

Third-party developer? Check out the official developers site for dev blogs, resources, and more.

Gallente Federation
#78 - 2012-07-16 17:48:36 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Good job!

The one thing I feel the need to nitpick about is that implant names are unnecessarily long:

Inherent Implants 'Noble' Hull Upgrades HG-1001

Only the underlined part of the name actually helps us understand which implant it is (please correct if wrong). The rest is a bit too much fluff. "Roleplay" relevant info should like the manufacturer name should be in the description.


I think there's value in the HG-1001 encoding. "HG" gives us a short, unambiguous way to refer to (or autolink) the implant without spelling it out. The "-10" tells you that it goes in implant slot 10, which is important enough that it's worth making explicit in the name.

I agree that "Inherent Implants 'Noble'" isn't adding a lot of value, and I think we can make a reasonable compromise. How about dropping "Inherent Implants" but keeping "Noble"? 'Noble' already implies the manufacturer, and the manufacturers are not particularly relevant or evocative as NPC corporations. Knowing the manufacturer doesn't even help me to guess which LP stores might carry the implant.*

We'd still have "Imperial Navy" etc. for the faction variants, as usual. I'd be perfectly happy to read:

'Noble' Hull Upgrades HG-1001
'Lancer' Large Energy Turret LE-1005
'Beancounter' Research RR-603

If nothing else, the (admittedly idiosyncratic) names help to distinguish the implants from similarly named skills.

*Feature opportunity! Add a tab to the Info window for LP items listing the corporations which carry them.
#79 - 2012-07-16 17:58:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Haifisch Zahne
Given that Eve's theory of motion can be described as if the ships are moving through "molasses", I wouldn't jump to any conclusions.


NAM TRON wrote:
Wenron wrote:
Yay, nice changes!

Could you please spare some time to fix the name on Sensor Damps?!

Dampening = getting something wet. (unless a SD is some sort of zero-G space watergun that aims for sensor arrays, I don't think this is what you mean the module to be named).


Damping = reducing effects.

Pretty please update this!


Google says:
dampeningpresent participle of damp·en (Verb)
Verb
  1. Make slightly wet: "the fine rain dampened her face".
  2. Make less strong or intense: "nothing could dampen her enthusiasm".


Obviously, CCP is going with the 2nd definition.
C C P Alliance
#80 - 2012-07-16 18:04:08 UTC
Shamhat Arete wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Good job!

The one thing I feel the need to nitpick about is that implant names are unnecessarily long:

Inherent Implants 'Noble' Hull Upgrades HG-1001

Only the underlined part of the name actually helps us understand which implant it is (please correct if wrong). The rest is a bit too much fluff. "Roleplay" relevant info should like the manufacturer name should be in the description.


I think there's value in the HG-1001 encoding. "HG" gives us a short, unambiguous way to refer to (or autolink) the implant without spelling it out. The "-10" tells you that it goes in implant slot 10, which is important enough that it's worth making explicit in the name.

I agree that "Inherent Implants 'Noble'" isn't adding a lot of value, and I think we can make a reasonable compromise. How about dropping "Inherent Implants" but keeping "Noble"? 'Noble' already implies the manufacturer, and the manufacturers are not particularly relevant or evocative as NPC corporations. Knowing the manufacturer doesn't even help me to guess which LP stores might carry the implant.*

We'd still have "Imperial Navy" etc. for the faction variants, as usual. I'd be perfectly happy to read:

'Noble' Hull Upgrades HG-1001
'Lancer' Large Energy Turret LE-1005
'Beancounter' Research RR-603

If nothing else, the (admittedly idiosyncratic) names help to distinguish the implants from similarly named skills.

*Feature opportunity! Add a tab to the Info window for LP items listing the corporations which carry them.


It is actually as follows:
HG-1001 = Short name for implant
HG-1001 = Slot number
HG-1001 = Percentage boost the implant gives

I am actually not sure what the Inherent Implants represents.

@CCP_FoxFour // Technical Designer // Team Tech Co

Third-party developer? Check out the official developers site for dev blogs, resources, and more.

Forum Jump