Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
   |
Posted - 2010.02.26 09:20:00 -
[1]
The standings granularity is insufficient.
For most, red or orange doesn't matter. It's people you shoot.
However the standings in the positive side are used to depict different levels of trust as well as people you're not going to shoot at.
As far as "shooting or not" is concerned, 1 level of blue/red would be sufficient, but as far as "control and access" is concerned, that's not sufficient at all...
In that case there's only 2 levels of blue, which are very very much insufficient. There's people you don't want to shoot but don't trust, there's people you trust enough to fly with, there's allies that you trust to a limited extent and a very precious few you trust with access to your sensitive stuff. It doesn't matter to the average grunt, but for diplomats and managers, it does. If you want to limit the available standings, there needs to be more levels of blue.
As far as the availability of corporate roster is concerned, it's a big issue with wardecs. Most corporations with industry characters prefer them to remain hidden in case of war, not necessarily because they can be killed, but because it may give information as to what systems/stations corporations use as production hubs. Right now getting a handle on those characters is practically impossible for an aggressor as they don't appear on killboards are are thus unlocatable. We've made the case in CSM 2 and 3 that wardecs are essentially (currently) used as a griefing tool more than anything else. With this extra information, it becomes even more of a problem especially for small industrial corporations.
The gains of a working social networking gate are not outweighed by the disadvantages in-game in this instance.
Suggestion:
- Give an option to opt-out the display of corp/alliance membership in Eve Gate on a character basis.
Ignore that "opt out" in case the corporation is currently the aggressor in a war.
These 2 steps are insufficient in guaranteeing the same level of covertness as before, but they may be sufficient in removing the most glaring downside of having that information public.
There is no signature |