Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Artemis duLac
|
Posted - 2005.09.07 02:26:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Artemis duLac on 07/09/2005 02:27:41 I have formed the opinion that CCP have several mechanisms in place to deliberately encourage crime. I urge you CCP, to reconsider this strategy.
My corp recently had some items go missing. No one claims to have taken them but a GM confirmed that a missing BS had been moved by someone and subsequently sold. We've dealt with theft before, we'll deal with it again.
Now.. please advise me in which reality a corporation would allow someone, even a trusted member of a corp, to fly a BATTLESHIP out of a corp hangar without at least recording that the item was taken? Heck, I have to sign for a company car when I need to do business travel. Why wouldn't we implement such basic tracking for our corp hangars?
The GM advised me to make use of in-game security measures. Amazingly he even managed to keep a straight face while saying it. I respond thusly: You can't make a factory slot deposit into an audit can. You can't build out of an audit can. You don't make audit cans that can be shipped to our regional offices.
Furthur, I've noticed that even audit cans are designed to encourage theft. Locks, unlocks and deposits are recorded in the log but removals are not.
Jet cans... this really makes me laugh... the game stops me DEPOSITING if I'm not in the gang but anyone can take from it. WTF? Why prevent deposits? Why problem does that solve? Or did someone implement something backwards?
I can tolerate dodgy naming on escrow. I can tolerate gate camps (even if I can't understand the mindset of the campers) but for the love of that which you hold sacred, please have a little reality check on what 'reasonable precations' a person or corp might make to safe-guard their gear and implement such features. E-O is a great game but there are many pro-griefer, pro-thief etc 'features' that wear on me.
I believe thieves are distinctly in the minority. Making changes that alienate them will not detract from the gameplay of too many people and it will greatly enhances the gameplay of many.
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.09.07 08:06:00 -
[2]
yawn
did that vent your frustration well enough ? Then next time, dont give a BS to someone you dont trust not to take it. _______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know. Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online Solutions to your issues. |
Civ Zomas
|
Posted - 2005.09.07 10:12:00 -
[3]
The jettison can is fine, albeit a little quirky. (You might be glad of that "no deposit" idea with the contraband system btw.) Being able to steal stuff in space is part of the game, though I'm not unhappy to see some risk being introduced to the ore/loot thief "profession."
My eyes did roll when I saw CCP's "solution" to hangar management though...
Audit log containers were a waste of development effort IMO. They do not solve the problems of security and organisation, which could've been solved by much simpler means:
1. Audit logs for the hangars - i.e. what came in and out of the hangars, where it went/came from, who moved it and when. Is it really beyond the wit of man to allow security officers to check a corp's security?
2. Hangar partition containers to ease the insanity of Eve's thousands of different item types. This was the main use I had in mind for the new containers, but the auto locking "feature" and other restrictions make this more inconvenient than not using them at all.
or...
2b. Filter for hangar views - the ability to filter hangar contents by item type would remove the need for partitioning cans. Given a sane user interface, this would ease the use of hangars considerably.
|
Artemis duLac
|
Posted - 2005.09.07 15:35:00 -
[4]
Why do people take the time to read this forum if all they intend to do is troll? Don't you have a better use for your time?
The BS came out of the factory and was stolen before it could be given to the intended pilot. We keep a reasonably tight check on hangar access and apparently someone whom we have had no reason to distrust has decided to give in to temptation. I don't see anything wrong in expecting to be able to see who moved the ship our of our hangar.
It's not a rant to vent my frustration, Rod. It's just that over the past couple of weeks I've been in a position to see the gaps with greater clarity and I am disappointed so I decided to post a suggestion. If you have something constructive to add, please do so. Otherwise, run along and annoy someone else.
|
Lord Aradon
|
Posted - 2005.09.07 15:48:00 -
[5]
solution to this answer is pretty good
Audit the corp, you can see what each member has done recently if im not mistaken.
Or corp insure the ship, so long as they dont re-package the ship the insurance will be paid to the corp once the ship is destroyed. ---- Join Us
Free Websites |
Artemis duLac
|
Posted - 2005.09.08 02:17:00 -
[6]
One of our directors (one I trust completely) did an audit and said that no useful info was revealed.
Corp insure is not a suitable solution as it won't help for that period between build and use; you can't freight them when assembled and of coruse the first thing a thief will do is repackage. It's an awfully expensive process for a doubtful tracking method.
|
Klaus Hauptmann
|
Posted - 2005.09.08 06:12:00 -
[7]
Hi there,
I agree to the basic problems outlined here, the means of managing corporation equipment (even your own, at that) are quite limited.
What I would find useful, similar a bit to the idea of filters, is the ability of having simple "Sub-Folders" in the Hangars, which are treated in all respect like a real corp hangar, just that they are sitting inside another hangar. Basically like a subdirectory on one's harddisk.
Otherwise then that, simply \signed. ;-) Lt. Cmdr. Klaus Hauptmann Commander First Battle Group Commonwealth Union http://www.sierra.privat.t-online.de/EVE |
TuRtLe HeAd
|
Posted - 2005.09.08 07:54:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Artemis duLac One of our directors (one I trust completely) did an audit and said that no useful info was revealed.
Corp insure is not a suitable solution as it won't help for that period between build and use; you can't freight them when assembled and of coruse the first thing a thief will do is repackage. It's an awfully expensive process for a doubtful tracking method.
Its him then.
Obviously u have trust issues with in the Corp, Re-tract everyones roles apart from those closest to you and then re-disribute roles as they earn Trust back. Just tell them you are undergoing corp restructuring.
That BS should go into a hanger that only trusted members have access to, If you outputted to a hanger and some new player saw it, of course its gone.
Theres plenty of security things you can do to stop/reduce this sort of thing, You just have to monitor it regularly
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.09.08 08:23:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Rod Blaine on 08/09/2005 08:24:53 Why do you even produce into a corp hangar ?
Use production alts in a production corp and transfer produced goods to main corp as needed. A large corp like STK should be able to pull that off is it not ?
Btw, the reason I responded overly hostile is because your original post was a whine, not a reasonable proposal. _______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know. Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online Solutions to your issues. |
Civ Zomas
|
Posted - 2005.09.08 13:58:00 -
[10]
Using private hangars to produce stuff would of course eliminate the security risk (this was my solution too,) but that is rather missing the point: Corp hangars suck. The fact this solution is even considered shows there is something seriously wrong with them.
|
|
Saicon
|
Posted - 2005.09.08 22:49:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Artemis duLac The GM advised me to make use of in-game security measures. Amazingly he even managed to keep a straight face while saying it.
How do you know he had a straight face?
Originally by: Necrologic This made me laugh so hard cottage cheese came out of my nose. More disturbingly, i wasn't eating cottage cheese at the time.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |