Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Crius] Manufacturing and general UI feedback

First post First post
Author
Hansa Teutonica
#261 - 2014-07-06 20:47:55 UTC
Good
  • Unified UI for industry/manufacturing
  • Showinfo for Outcome -> see material requirements for potential T2-BPC P


  • Bad/Improvements
  • Stack of blueprints start a job, but no direct indikator for "do it run now?" -> block start-button for a second and made it in another color or show a "jobstart"-tooltip
  • BPO dont show invention-requirements; only way in new interface: open BPO in industry select copy click output info, but this is much more complicated
  • visible jobcost for a jobtype not available on station is insanly high -> when jobtype not available simply show no jobcost
  • Curatores Veritatis Alliance
    #262 - 2014-07-06 23:28:59 UTC
    changes look good for the most part.

    one big problem though for those who use BPOs as a corp resource:

    as of right now corp theft is not really a problem since the BPO can be locked inside a station and you can still use the bpo for jobs in a POS eg copy - ME/TE - manufacturing.

    with the new changes , you will have to first move the BPOs to the pos, and i have no problem with this. But you will also have to move them to the specific facility for the job- i.e you need to put the BPO in the ship assembly to build a ship from the BPO, or the BPO needs to be in the design lab to get copied.

    what this means is that these blueprints cant be locked and saved from corp theft with these new changes since they will be needed for different things.

    what i propose is that the blueprints still need to be brought to the actual POS, but only need to be in any hangar in the POS to be used for all facilities inside the POS.

    i.e: all BPOs are locked inside the corp hangar array, and can be used for copying in the design lab or used for manufacturing in the assembly arrays.

    IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!!

    Mercenary Coalition
    #263 - 2014-07-07 10:51:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
    Invention BP display uses the BPO icon both in the central ring as well as the list. Again (as it did on TQ with the contracts. Roll)

    There should also be a visual indication that you need to select the outcome on AF-BPC invention. I, and many others, are used to the pre-selected ship for invention and a short blink (like the diagonal effect on Wallet or Chat in the sidebar) wouldn't hurt to direct my attention to the bleak menu list in the middle of no where.

    Moreover: after the Delivery of a Job, the Indu window keeps the delivered job selected in the upper part and does not show the next job in the list, which is already highlighted in the list. This is straining. The missing mass delivery was already reported, but I say it again: Mass Delivery needed.

    A thing that I find ... interesting is that module invention subtracts 1 Run from a T1 BPC to create a 10 Run T2 BPC... That sounds a bit illogical to me.

    UI Improvement Collective

    My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

    Mercenary Coalition
    #264 - 2014-07-07 10:53:12 UTC
    sten mattson wrote:
    changes look good for the most part.

    one big problem though for those who use BPOs as a corp resource:

    ... theft ...


    Simple solution: Create a 1-man corp for your BPO holder and let him copy, day in, day out. More cooperation is not desired in this case, and this is the only way to keep your BPO safe.

    UI Improvement Collective

    My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

    Minmatar Republic
    #265 - 2014-07-08 07:14:25 UTC  |  Edited by: D4mane
    Unable to install job due to the following reasons:
    The job cost has changed
    The facility tax rates have changed

    Error.MISMATCH_COST (6487, 4541)
    Error.MISMATCH_TAX (649, 454)

    While trying to install an invention job.

    Also, I hired a ME team, but I can't see any effects on either stats or lower material requirements of a blueprint.

    EDIT: In regards to the ME team. It is a -3% ME team for what I'm building and I only see a small decrease when building capital components. Didn't try large, but small and medium components are not affected by the -3% ME team, and it is the max I can get.
    Caldari State
    #266 - 2014-07-09 04:03:21 UTC
    The old 'Bill of Materials' tab has disappeared from blueprint info. That's probably intentional. The attributes tab has ALSO disappeared, please tell me that's NOT intentional because it's the only place you can see maximum licensed runs.
    Brotherhood of Spacers
    #267 - 2014-07-09 08:51:48 UTC
    Hello CCP devs and another capsuler!

    I have detected some problem (on singularity), with Manufacturing UI.
    I list the points.

    1. Not all time refreshing the raw materials. When i add material that corp divisons, sometime not refresh in the Manufacturing UI. I should place somewhere a refresh button.

    2. Manufacture cost. Theoretically, more assemlby array reduce the Manufacture cost. When i have 1 onilne (Large Assambly Array) its give a -3% bonus, but when i online more another Large Assambly arrey, not stack the bounus, its stay on 3% .
    I should place somewhere a refresh button as the previous point.

    3. And one mor annoying thing. E.g. when i use a BP from crop hangars DIVISON 7 on the manufacture ui auto set the input/output material location for division 1.
    I think, is more logical, when i use a BP from e.g. division 6, the system auto set the input/output material location to division 6 (or that place where i have click the BP)

    That's all I have found what I think should be improved.
    Pandemic Legion
    #268 - 2014-07-10 00:54:16 UTC
    Kenneth Feld wrote:
    CCP RubberBAND wrote:

    Kenneth Feld wrote:


    Can you give us an idea on the feature set?

    Will it be like POCO tax, where we can control tax by station owner settings?


    Also as a general point. We probably won't get the settings window for Outposts in before the weekend, but the intention is for it to be closer to the POCO settings window you know and love.




    Can we get an idea on what it is going to apply to?

    Reprocessing
    Industrial lines
    Laboratory services
    Clones
    Repairs

    That would freaking awesome if it applied to all current services as well as the industry stuff


    Quoting myself as they showed up on SiSi today

    Looks pretty good

    ANY CHANCE that same exact window could replace the flat reprocessing tax as well????????????
    Affirmative.
    #269 - 2014-07-10 13:51:08 UTC
    Not sure if this is the right thread to respond to, but hopefully it is.

    First up the new S&I interface is visually stunning but completely fails at being usable, frankly the tooltips are more helpful than the interface in some cases. for example deciphering what the build requirements actually are:
    http://i.imgur.com/1URXNbt.jpg
    Frankly I don't know what any of the icons on the left are, I don't want to be constantly hovering over every item to find out what mineral/PI Goods/components/other the build requirements are. The tooltip from the screenshot is better at showing the build requirements than the actual interface.

    Next pet peeve, Job Duration, how about actually showing it in a XXd XXh XXm XXs format instead of the XX:XX:XX:XX:XX:XX format which is far from easy to read, or at least give a human readable format in the tooltip.

    Blueprints tab, I see that it has been mentioned a few times, but the ability to filter based on BPO or BPC or Both would be very much required. One of the most common things I do is probably filter by BPO and then sort on either ME or PE and then research the ones that have low amounts, having the BPCs in the mix makes it allot harder to easily do this.

    Facilities tab, actually no real comments for this tab. Although I found it comical that there was effectively no difference between details view and List view apart from the size of the icons/zoom.

    Jobs tab, same as facilities tab, no real comments for this tab. Although I again I found it comical that there was effectively no difference between details view and List view apart from the size of the icons/zoom. However it was the first tab that I found that I wanted to make the window wider and found that I couldn't, frankly trying to see all of the columns with long blueprint/character/station names will be very difficult in the limited width.

    Teams Tab, I don't really understand this too much so can't really comment too much on it, however when installing jobs, I'm only going to want to see teams that are already in my location, not try and bid and then wait for them to come to me etc.
    (please note that I more use S&I to be self sufficient and not for producing to sell, so my usage is sporadic and more that I produce stuff when I need it.)


    General note, I felt that it was odd to select the input material location on the output side of the horizontal flowchart. It would probably feel more normal to have it with the inputs, when I first went looking for it, it took a while to locate it.






    C C P Alliance
    #270 - 2014-07-10 16:38:11 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
    Update about a particular point we forgot to mention which concerns Tech II blueprints (original or not).

    Most Tech I materials have been removed from Tech II blueprints. More precisely, minerals that are not morphite and components that are not Advanced Components or Advanced Capital Components have been removed. Planetary Commodities have not been touched.

    This does not apply to Tech I items required for Tech II manufacturing, those are staying and still have exceptions to the Material Efficiency and skill bonuses so that, for example:

    • A Paladin should never require require 2 Apocalypses to build
    • Large shield Extender II should never require 0.75 Large Shield Extender I to build


    In some cases blueprint requirements have been modified to make sure price is not fluctuating too much. For example if we are removing too many materials out of a Tech II blueprint requirements we would be increasing some Tech II components a bit to compensate.

    This change has been done in order to clarify the production process between Tech I and II items since most of the time, the very minerals that were required in a Tech II blueprint were already present in the Tech I item required in that same blueprint. Example: tritanium was already present inside the Apocalypse to build a Paladin.
    Pandemic Legion
    #271 - 2014-07-10 18:27:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Alexander McKeon
    Well that's unfortunate. No more going into lowsec, buying 100 million m3 of Trit / Pyerite, manufacturing T2 explosive hardeners on site and exporting it all to hisec in a blockade runner. It was such a nice way to exploit cheap minerals far from Jita.

    With the release only 12 days away and while we're on the subject of material inputs, any news on the Material Efficiency skill?
    #272 - 2014-07-10 18:50:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaija Asanari
    Teams Feedback:

    When you click on a BPO, it auto-fills filters for itself in the Teams window (World, Consumable, Ammo, etc). When you remove the blueprint (right click on it, Remove Blueprint) - it should clear these filters as well. This was very confusing during the mass test, and people were being told to close/reopen the UI.

    No filter in the Teams Chartering section to show you all of the teams that you have bid on, so you can quickly see which teams you bid on, and when they complete. Having a "My Bids" section/filter would be very helpful so you can keep on top of your bids (to make sure you are the top bidder).

    When you are bidding on a team, you can only see the top 3 systems that have bids. No way to tell if other people are trying to bid to bring that team to a system if it drops below the top 3 bids.

    When trying to enter a bid, the system name should start auto-completing as you type. It's not intuitive to have to type and then hit enter for it to find the names to select.

    I also don't like the fact that I have to hover over every one of the teams to see a tooltip popup of "My Bids" to verify if I am the top bidder. Having a column with checkbox/x or something like that would be nice - or is this to prevent UI twitch bidding?

    The Team Name/ID are not unique. When we did the mass test we were bidding on a DST100 team (I believe). There was another team with the same ID already active in a lowsec system.

    The entire Teams list disappeared for a lot of people during the mass test. Had to restart the Industry UI to get it back.
    #273 - 2014-07-10 19:04:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Dinsdale Pirannha
    Let's seem where to start....

    Just participated in the masstest.

    1. Was able to create a Capital Turret copy job of 1 copy, but 40 runs. Job will take (edit, can't read a countdown clock) 4 days, 20 hours to run. Given that the UI explicitly states max run is 20, what gives?

    2. Though I know it won't be acknowledged by an dev, because it means actually following through with a comment made by greyscale, here goes.

    greyscale, how about commenting on this?:
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4790983#post4790983
    Gallente Federation
    #274 - 2014-07-10 19:08:16 UTC
    Already submitted the mass test survey but I thought of a few more comments:

    Regarding the Start button on the UI: eventually I figured out that it was using yellow vs blue to help show a difference between manufacturing and research jobs, but at first I thought that a yellow Start button meant that there was a problem and the Start button wouldn't work yet.

    I think it would be more appealing if it did work that way: make the start button red or something if there's something that would prevent the job from working (not enough input materials, or missing a skill, or too many jobs already). Then have it change from NOGO to GO color when all conditions are good. Bonus if a tooltip on the start button could show what the current problems are, that would prevent the job from being installed. As it is now, I was clicking the start button just to find out if there was anything else I had to set up for the job.
    #275 - 2014-07-10 19:10:24 UTC
    I thought I'd be nitpicking to point that out - the start/stop/deliver button should be the same color regardless of the type of job. And the manufacturing section having "yellow" does make it look like something is wrong.
    C C P Alliance
    #276 - 2014-07-10 21:47:10 UTC
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    Let's seem where to start....

    Just participated in the masstest.

    1. Was able to create a Capital Turret copy job of 1 copy, but 40 runs. Job will take (edit, can't read a countdown clock) 4 days, 20 hours to run. Given that the UI explicitly states max run is 20, what gives?

    2. Though I know it won't be acknowledged by an dev, because it means actually following through with a comment made by greyscale, here goes.

    greyscale, how about commenting on this?:
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4790983#post4790983


    1. Which bit of the UI? Showinfo is I believe still inaccurate, you'll want to check the actual industry UI for real numbers. If you mean capital turret hardpoints, I believe we bumped the runs on those up so you could do a week's worth of bulid in one go.

    2. See above, and also note if you haven't already that the displayed percentage is material reduction, not remaining waste. There is no explicit "waste" in the new system.
    #277 - 2014-07-11 01:19:02 UTC
    CCP Greyscale wrote:
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    Let's seem where to start....

    Just participated in the masstest.

    1. Was able to create a Capital Turret copy job of 1 copy, but 40 runs. Job will take (edit, can't read a countdown clock) 4 days, 20 hours to run. Given that the UI explicitly states max run is 20, what gives?

    2. Though I know it won't be acknowledged by an dev, because it means actually following through with a comment made by greyscale, here goes.

    greyscale, how about commenting on this?:
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4790983#post4790983


    1. Which bit of the UI? Showinfo is I believe still inaccurate, you'll want to check the actual industry UI for real numbers. If you mean capital turret hardpoints, I believe we bumped the runs on those up so you could do a week's worth of bulid in one go.

    2. See above, and also note if you haven't already that the displayed percentage is material reduction, not remaining waste. There is no explicit "waste" in the new system.


    Look, I am not sure how I can get this through your head...

    1. I am on Sisi right now, and staring at the new industry UI. You can access my account and see for yourself. There is a Capital Turret copying job going on right now in PVH8-O. It is one copy, but 40 runs. When I insert my other Cap BPO I brought with me, the UI explicitly states, just below the team icon, and above the BPO icon "Maximum Runs", and under that "20". Look at the damn thing yourself.

    2. WTF are you talking about? Grab a ME3 Archon BPO on TQ, today. Look how many modules it takes to build an Archon. Now take an Archon BPO on Sisi, with 7% "material reduction" as you call it. Look at the modules needed to produce the same Archon, using the new industry UI.
    It has gone from 127 Capital Components to 136. I can make a bloody list for comparison if you can't see it.

    How difficult is that to understand? You have to adjust the waste on these BPO's, drastically, to maintain fairness. My ME3 Archon BPO on T1 has waste of 1/126 = 0.79%. The same BPO, being converted to 7%, now has waste of 10/126 = 7.94%.
    This is not rocket science. Just look at the BPO or BPC at 7% using the new UI and see what components are now needed compared to the same blueprint on TQ using the old UI.
    Minmatar Republic
    #278 - 2014-07-11 03:23:01 UTC
    Would it be possible to get rid of the grey area above the Teams section, when we're just doing the bidding etc.? Only 4 teams fit and it's a lot of scrolling, while there is all this wasted space on top. Would be nice to have a tiny triangle to collapse that section.
    #279 - 2014-07-11 08:31:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Luci Lu
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    CCP Greyscale wrote:
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    Let's seem where to start....

    Just participated in the masstest.

    1. Was able to create a Capital Turret copy job of 1 copy, but 40 runs. Job will take (edit, can't read a countdown clock) 4 days, 20 hours to run. Given that the UI explicitly states max run is 20, what gives?

    2. Though I know it won't be acknowledged by an dev, because it means actually following through with a comment made by greyscale, here goes.

    greyscale, how about commenting on this?:
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4790983#post4790983


    1. Which bit of the UI? Showinfo is I believe still inaccurate, you'll want to check the actual industry UI for real numbers. If you mean capital turret hardpoints, I believe we bumped the runs on those up so you could do a week's worth of bulid in one go.

    2. See above, and also note if you haven't already that the displayed percentage is material reduction, not remaining waste. There is no explicit "waste" in the new system.


    Look, I am not sure how I can get this through your head...

    1. I am on Sisi right now, and staring at the new industry UI. You can access my account and see for yourself. There is a Capital Turret copying job going on right now in PVH8-O. It is one copy, but 40 runs. When I insert my other Cap BPO I brought with me, the UI explicitly states, just below the team icon, and above the BPO icon "Maximum Runs", and under that "20". Look at the damn thing yourself.

    2. WTF are you talking about? Grab a ME3 Archon BPO on TQ, today. Look how many modules it takes to build an Archon. Now take an Archon BPO on Sisi, with 7% "material reduction" as you call it. Look at the modules needed to produce the same Archon, using the new industry UI.
    It has gone from 127 Capital Components to 136. I can make a bloody list for comparison if you can't see it.

    How difficult is that to understand? You have to adjust the waste on these BPO's, drastically, to maintain fairness. My ME3 Archon BPO on T1 has waste of 1/126 = 0.79%. The same BPO, being converted to 7%, now has waste of 10/126 = 7.94%.
    This is not rocket science. Just look at the BPO or BPC at 7% using the new UI and see what components are now needed compared to the same blueprint on TQ using the old UI.


    well queueing 10 carriers will fix that , at least thats what i got from earlier discussions about that topic as ccp nowdays rounds up. they dodge the promise about not making the bpos worse by referencing that.

    in the end its me 10 or bust :)

    but then they could just multiply component needs by 100, reduce size and material costs of them accordingly and everything would work fine.

    they already need to run such scripts anyway so why not do it for that too. seems so simple :(
    C C P Alliance
    #280 - 2014-07-11 10:37:30 UTC
    CCP Greyscale wrote:
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    Let's seem where to start....

    Just participated in the masstest.

    1. Was able to create a Capital Turret copy job of 1 copy, but 40 runs. Job will take (edit, can't read a countdown clock) 4 days, 20 hours to run. Given that the UI explicitly states max run is 20, what gives?

    2. Though I know it won't be acknowledged by an dev, because it means actually following through with a comment made by greyscale, here goes.

    greyscale, how about commenting on this?:
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4790983#post4790983


    1. Which bit of the UI? Showinfo is I believe still inaccurate, you'll want to check the actual industry UI for real numbers. If you mean capital turret hardpoints, I believe we bumped the runs on those up so you could do a week's worth of bulid in one go.

    2. See above, and also note if you haven't already that the displayed percentage is material reduction, not remaining waste. There is no explicit "waste" in the new system.


    Update to this comment: after further poking we've identified that the update script is using old math which doesn't map properly; in particular, blueprints with an ME of 2 or 3 were being under-upgraded. This is getting fixed and should be fine for TQ. Thanks for the heads-up :)
    Forum Jump