Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aelita
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 07:25:00 -
[1]
As far as I remember there was news about two or three months ago. In that news was warning that all anchored cans would pass away in 0.8 and above systems.
Clearly something seems to be broken because 0.8 and above systems are still polluted by anchored containers. What about unanchored them all at next DT so that way everyone will be able scoop it in cargo and clean-up space.
Personally I think infinite anchor time even in 0.0 is pointless. Anchoring should extend period of existence of container but not forever. People who did anchor containers sometime leave game and EVE becoming polluted with these unused containers. My recommendation should be next:
1) Anchored container stay anchored for prolonged time period (days, weeks depend on skill) 2) Anchored container needs to be maintained by owner (like push the trigger every few days) 3) If no one will maintain container then container will go unanchored automatically 4) For certain period unanchored container will stay in space free for all 5) After timer will expire container will explode
I hate to see anchored containers from persons who are no more in game for about months or year. Containers are pollution even in 0.0 space.
|
Aelita
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 07:25:00 -
[2]
As far as I remember there was news about two or three months ago. In that news was warning that all anchored cans would pass away in 0.8 and above systems.
Clearly something seems to be broken because 0.8 and above systems are still polluted by anchored containers. What about unanchored them all at next DT so that way everyone will be able scoop it in cargo and clean-up space.
Personally I think infinite anchor time even in 0.0 is pointless. Anchoring should extend period of existence of container but not forever. People who did anchor containers sometime leave game and EVE becoming polluted with these unused containers. My recommendation should be next:
1) Anchored container stay anchored for prolonged time period (days, weeks depend on skill) 2) Anchored container needs to be maintained by owner (like push the trigger every few days) 3) If no one will maintain container then container will go unanchored automatically 4) For certain period unanchored container will stay in space free for all 5) After timer will expire container will explode
I hate to see anchored containers from persons who are no more in game for about months or year. Containers are pollution even in 0.0 space.
|
Slarti
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 08:08:00 -
[3]
Yes these old cans are an environmental problem. They should degrade like standard jet cans but very slowly. If their owner still wanted them they would have to be taken back to a station and repaired for a nominal cost.
This would get rid of all the old cans owned by people who have left the game instead of cluttering up the belts...
Just my 2isk on an issue that has anoyed me for ages
www.vogon.homestead.com
|
Slarti
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 08:08:00 -
[4]
Yes these old cans are an environmental problem. They should degrade like standard jet cans but very slowly. If their owner still wanted them they would have to be taken back to a station and repaired for a nominal cost.
This would get rid of all the old cans owned by people who have left the game instead of cluttering up the belts...
Just my 2isk on an issue that has anoyed me for ages
www.vogon.homestead.com
|
Chicolini
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 08:22:00 -
[5]
I can see your point, Aelita. Lost nearly a battleship to concord while testing my fitting in Nonni. My logs told me, that one of my torps accid. damaged a small-secure-can ...
I agree that something must happen in this case. I really don't like the advertising-secure-cans at the gets, too.
IMHO a sort of timer would generate a lot of dull work for the owner of the cans.
Maybe there should be a ban-radius or something around all "official" places like gates and belts etc., so that things can't be anchored there, to keep that areas clean. You have to anchor them at your safe-spots for your private amusement only.
Greetings Chicolini
|
Chicolini
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 08:22:00 -
[6]
I can see your point, Aelita. Lost nearly a battleship to concord while testing my fitting in Nonni. My logs told me, that one of my torps accid. damaged a small-secure-can ...
I agree that something must happen in this case. I really don't like the advertising-secure-cans at the gets, too.
IMHO a sort of timer would generate a lot of dull work for the owner of the cans.
Maybe there should be a ban-radius or something around all "official" places like gates and belts etc., so that things can't be anchored there, to keep that areas clean. You have to anchor them at your safe-spots for your private amusement only.
Greetings Chicolini
|
Aelita
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 08:26:00 -
[7]
Hmm maintan containers is dull, right. So what about upkeep cost and ban containers in same grid as stations and stargates are. I think secure cans in belts are necesary, but they can't be infinite. This is why I'd think about maintain them.
It's really stupid to see same can in belt for past 8 months when I know that owner is gone from game.
|
Aelita
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 08:26:00 -
[8]
Hmm maintan containers is dull, right. So what about upkeep cost and ban containers in same grid as stations and stargates are. I think secure cans in belts are necesary, but they can't be infinite. This is why I'd think about maintain them.
It's really stupid to see same can in belt for past 8 months when I know that owner is gone from game.
|
Chicolini
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 08:41:00 -
[9]
I agree.
|
Chicolini
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 08:41:00 -
[10]
I agree.
|
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 09:10:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Chicolini I can see your point, Aelita. Lost nearly a battleship to concord while testing my fitting in Nonni. My logs told me, that one of my torps accid. damaged a small-secure-can
Um, how? ______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots. They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 09:10:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Chicolini I can see your point, Aelita. Lost nearly a battleship to concord while testing my fitting in Nonni. My logs told me, that one of my torps accid. damaged a small-secure-can
Um, how? ______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots. They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Aelita
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 09:22:00 -
[13]
Avon: Torpedo have still splash damage. Damage done to container in 0.5 and above is counted as agression act against peacefull civilian. At least that you can read in pop-up explanation window. I felt nearly down from chair when I saw that pop-up message in 0.0 space when I'd try clean belt from NPC drop cans. LOL!
|
Aelita
|
Posted - 2004.09.16 09:22:00 -
[14]
Avon: Torpedo have still splash damage. Damage done to container in 0.5 and above is counted as agression act against peacefull civilian. At least that you can read in pop-up explanation window. I felt nearly down from chair when I saw that pop-up message in 0.0 space when I'd try clean belt from NPC drop cans. LOL!
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |