PI is great, and I can't imagine EVE without it, but it has the worst UX in gaming

It’s so, so very bad. Click “create route,” click on thing, then click “create route” a second time? But I already created the route, that’s why I clicked “create route.” Then the routes window automatically closes, so that you have to click it again to open it up and repeat the exact same process for every single route that you need to set up? Is this intentional torture?

I’ve been doing PI since it first came out. Last night I needed to set up 6 identical planets on 3 characters (which I had put off for 2 entire months because I knew how much it was going to hurt), but I had the drill DOWN. I knew exactly what I needed to do and how to do it most efficiently because I repeated it so many times.

It still took me 25-30 minutes per character.

This interface hasn’t been touched in 6 years. There are SO MANY little improvements that could be made, especially with routing, which is an exercise is madness.


It was already outdated when it came out.
Now it’s just a pain tolerance test.


@stefnia_Freir 100%.

The “revamp” that added a layer of lag to auto-remember the last thing you did to “lessen the number of clicks needed” was woefully inadequate for the complete architectural overhaul that was really needed.

Just allowing multiple selections in most of the windows would’ve been a huge improvement. Why can I not select one P1 material from a storage bin and assign it to multiple basic factories in one window?
If I highlighted my advanced factory and hovered over the inputs it needs for the material I want to produce, why aren’t the basic/advanced factories that make those materials, as well as routes and storage bins highlighted so I can easily find them? Why not go one step further and let me create routes from the end->start direction so I don’t need to close the advanced factory and open the storage bin to create the route?

And that’s before you look at some of the QOL things like adding minimum link distance before extra PG is needed, so you aren’t spending 20 minutes setting up stuff adjacent to each other to the exact adjacent pixel to have the PG needed for an extra extractor spot on your P2 manufacture set up…


setting up stuff adjacent to each other to the exact adjacent pixel

Oh, you mean when you’re trying to line something up right next to a bunch of things, and those things are actually PULSING in size? Lord.

Scanning was once this bad, and it’s now a million times better. CCP is more than capable of fixing this, but it’s just not been a priority yet. I wish they would put some time into a few simple things (like you mentioned), it would make a huge QOL life improvement.

Even just remembering the window size so that when you open the routes it hasn’t shrunk back down to its default size would be a huge improvement, and maybe a few hours of work to implement and test. Or maybe let us pin it open?

Or getting rid of the slider for setting how long you want a cycle to run – it’s the worst possible input method you could choose for that. You always have to slide to somewhere near what you want, and then click like 3-7 times to get it where you want it. Just give us an input box, like a sane designer would.


CCP wants PI users to legit suffer at this point it’s crazy.


It hurts just remembering that.

Use a hexagonal grid system. All the planets are scaled to planet radius so it’s a one-time work (the only change is the CPU and PG usage of links that is increase following radius)

Give us a designer :‘( :’(

1 Like

You might know already, but if you hover with mouse and use the mouse wheel you can get your duration set really fast.

Use double clicks:

double click factory, double click the resource you want double click the storage you want it to go to, everything works with double clicks its fast and efficient.

A thing with PI that irks me personally (I only run 1 character for a bit of extra money) is about Storages.

I would love to be able to set a maximum quota for a given material that is incoming, so that the extractor yeets the rest into the void once the quota is reached.
Reason: Be able to use 1 Storage as buffer, set it to a given percentage per incoming, and then just let it run full. A factory then pulls a given amount, and the next cycle then can try to refill it. Obviously, as time passes, storage would run lean, but if set up accordingly, the initial few cycles would top it off again.

Let’s not exaggerate. While it is a horrid click fest, it’s not the worst UX of gaming. You just lack perspective of pre-SNES gaming days to truly appreciate it. :innocent:

How is it a click fest, literally like 7 clicks to refresh planet, 15 seconds.

4 click’s to choose a product then another 2 clicks to set it’s drop off point its fast.

6 planets, 3 chars per account …


But the real click fest is when you initially set up the planets. Luckily this is a one-time investment (if your alliance doesn’t move several times a year) so it’s bearable.


1 Account with 3 char’s 6 planet’s each is nothing it’s fast as hell but if players are going to do it with 20 accounts and call it a click fest then its not a click fest they turned it into a click fest.

If CCP goes and makes it 1 click per account to refresh them then players will go Sigh this is such a click fest I have to log into all 500 of my accounts to refresh pi rolls eyes

I did this once, set up PI on a couple or three planets years ago.

I will NEVER, EVER do it again. It wasted hours of my life, very frustrating hours as well.

This is without doubt the most frustrating and annoying thing I have ever done in any game in over 40 years.

1 Like

It’s no more a waste of hours than spending hours at an asteroid belt or spending hours scanning data and relic sites. You just don’t get the payout from PI immediately but over the course of weeks. And if you leave it up for months, years, that PI effort pays you much more than the other activities ever could.

It is a lot of clicking though. Too many clicks compared to the amount of choices you make.

I get the pay out over time, what I refuse to do is set it all up again until they come up with a better system.

If they don’t then I’ll just have to accept the small loss (maybe) compared to running missions/anoms/mining etc.

It’s a clickfest.
The UI is ■■■■ : having to move your heads precisely is ■■■■, having to move your pins precisely is ■■■■.
They should have an auto relaunch button that places the heads where it’s best (or close to best) and restart the cycles automatically.

The tediousness of having to make several precise placement repeatedly, in a non-grided space, adds nothing to the game but a mental barrier to how much you are willing to hurt yourself. Those who promote this gameplay should be prosecuted for torture.

This mentality of accepting tediousness “because it culls down the weak” is why this game is still bad. Being a robot is nothing to be proud at. A game that is designed for robots is not designed for human.

1 Like

Is there an objective ‘best’ placement for heads though?

The scan results are straight up lying to you, depending on your skills.
Other players may be extracting from that same location, which you have to look into and take into account, or you can choose not to do so.
You can pick a site with ‘decent’ enough resources spread out. Or you can put it all on the same hotspot if you wish to extract it fast but have to act sooner.

I am not sure if head placement is something that should be automated.

Also while many actions in PI require an unnecessary amount of clicks for the amount of choices made, I enjoy head placement, because it’s one of the few things in PI that does allow you to make meaningful choices unlike confirming that I want to route aqueous liquids to a basic factory that I have already defined to take aqueous liquids as input material.

I like placing those heads more than I enjoy mining.

Should I ask CCP to automate mining for me?

1 Like

define what best is, and then you may tell.
That’s why I said “close to best”.

And other people may start cycles that you can’t see, and other people may be idle or their cycle can stop.
So no, you can’t take that into account.

I’m sure it is.

That’s the illusion of choice.
A choice that can be automated nevertheless.

Meaningful does not mean that your choice has an impact.
It means that your choice is the best or not up to you.
If when considering all the variables there is ONE best choice, then this choice is not meaningful.

So no, this is not a meaningful choice.

They already did it.