| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Neslo
   |
Posted - 2005.02.07 18:33:00 -
[1]
I have noticed and it's quite annoying really that when you set up a POS you have to give someone starbase configuration role in order for them to use a station maintance array, refining array, and other modules.
I would like to give my corporation members access to use such items without the ability to:
a) screw around with the tower management
b) offline / online modules
c) unanchor / anchor stuff
I know some will say don't give acces to those you don't trust, but right now, that's what i've had to do. Restrict access to directors of the corporation ONLY. But they have to refit ships for the people that want to have refitting, park their ships, refine their ore ETC ETC...
Can we please have a role that let's them USE the POS when modules are ONLINE?(IE they can't online a refinery but they could run a refining process if it was left online) (IE they could use a station maintance array, but only if it was left online)
???
Nes
PS- didn't want to do petitions because i don't really see them working, but this is something i would love to see happen.
From Ashes to Ashes... From Dust to Dust....
|
Lagartija Nick
|
Posted - 2005.02.07 18:57:00 -
[2]
Would be nice to extend those usage rights to people of your choosing outside of your corporation as well.
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2005.02.09 20:52:00 -
[3]
we really need this. its quite high security risk to give all your members starbase config role, especially in a corp with a hundred members...
"We brake for nobody"
|
voidvim
|
Posted - 2005.02.09 21:32:00 -
[4]
/signed
|
Archbishop
|
Posted - 2005.02.10 04:20:00 -
[5]
I agree with both Neslo and Iceblock on this one. Three "additional" roles would be great.
1. CORP - Use only access
(Allows your corpmates to use the facilities without having station management roles)
2. ALLIANCE - Use only access
(Allows your alliance mates to use the facilities without having station management roles)
3. SET NAME - Use only access
(Allows you to set the name of a corp or player outside your alliance you want to give access too)
Come on CCP this is a no-brainer here. Lets get it done!!
Archbishop 
VISIT THE PIE HOMEPAGE & FORUMS
PIE INFORMATION CENTER |
Dufas
|
Posted - 2005.02.10 07:00:00 -
[6]
::STAMPED::
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2005.02.10 10:27:00 -
[7]
maybe use standings to chose who can use the pos or not, corps or players with higher corp standing than +8.00 can use the pos functions for example, or any one with the password? or something?
"We brake for nobody"
|
Neslo
|
Posted - 2005.02.10 13:24:00 -
[8]
hmm perhaps making it based off standing isn't such a bad idea. This allows anyone that directors or CEOs (people they trust) given acces to USE only their facilities. This keeps the bad people out and the good people in so to speak :-) I like it.... Also if you do it based off standing all a corporation would need to do to allow it's members to use it is set standing to self at +10 or whatever. And if i didn't want all of my members to use the starbase i could just do it individually? hrm... not a bad idea at all... plus it wouldn't need to screw with the already buggy roles system. But be linked to the Corporation "standing" system. It doesn't serve much of a purpose other than to make weird colors on your scanner atm. (sorry for the ramble... thinking aloud in my typing...)
From Ashes to Ashes... From Dust to Dust....
|
Nebulanix
|
Posted - 2005.02.11 14:43:00 -
[9]
Ah yes.. the Roles game. Well Roles have a purpose or at least had one. They worked well in empire, but thus we ran amock in deep space.
The issues have been stated. Trust and rights issues are paramount when running a POS. Thats why the directors have all access. However, if your an unlucky minon waiting on a director to change out mods... switch ships.. refine ore.. It really really taxes the sanity. I spent half a day recently.. online floating in my tin can.. with nothing to do.. but turn blue.. 
The lack of granualarity on POS rights should be reworked. Give the directors control of the higher functions of anchoring POS structures/on and offlining structures. While members of corp can make use of lower access rights like Empire.
Also.. I was given a temporary role as director to change out mods.. I was able to remove my ship mods..but i was not able to replace them with ones that I wanted. I was 500 to 1000k from Ship module.  At that point I had been on an hour trying to reconfigure setups and test things. Anyone else have problems with Roles and Ships mods? Call Heraldo... 
|
Whitestar1
|
Posted - 2005.02.11 15:03:00 -
[10]
Havent had any problems over here in Kent BUT I do agree that the POS roles system is ballsed up and needs to be sorted asap. Im a little suprised it wasnt done before release of exodus tbh. Lets hope that the next patch that comes out has these new roles to allow for greater access control.
We live for the one we die for the one |
Tas Devil
|
Posted - 2005.02.11 15:14:00 -
[11]
Signed... this is required urgently
|
Durakus
|
Posted - 2005.02.12 00:34:00 -
[12]
Signed. is a great idea that i think should already be an option. please add it on
|
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.02.12 03:23:00 -
[13]
At least let us have an option to let anyone refit their ship using the mait array without any other permissions! This alone would save us a MASSIVE amount of time!
--
The best description of alliances, ever:
|
Neslo
|
Posted - 2005.02.12 05:52:00 -
[14]
As I have yet to see a GM, Dev, or anyone of official status post in these forums, please head over to patch review forums to sign the petition over there.
Nes
From Ashes to Ashes... From Dust to Dust....
|
true sight
|
Posted - 2005.02.15 01:43:00 -
[15]
I havent even used pos myself, and agree that sounds like a very good idea
|
gragley
|
Posted - 2005.02.15 15:46:00 -
[16]
Signed!!
|
Katya Detia
|
Posted - 2005.02.15 15:55:00 -
[17]
Signed
---------------------------
CEO: Black Sea Industries
|
VonKaplanek III
|
Posted - 2005.02.16 15:45:00 -
[18]
Signed
|
Lord Feste
|
Posted - 2005.02.16 21:52:00 -
[19]
Signed.
|
Wolf Zero
|
Posted - 2005.02.17 11:28:00 -
[20]
Signed! 
|
Larno
|
Posted - 2005.02.17 11:58:00 -
[21]
As a side note, I think that no cap should be needed to online modules while next to a ship maintenance array.
|
Asfa
|
Posted - 2005.02.17 22:35:00 -
[22]
signed.
|
happy
|
Posted - 2005.02.25 11:29:00 -
[23]
agreed
If your happy and you know it clap your hands...... and if your not happy and you know it, .....its probaly because i just podded
you
|
Sharies
|
Posted - 2005.02.25 16:00:00 -
[24]
Could there be seperate hangers in the maintenance array for different levels of corp members so everyone in a corp can't just go and take whoever's ship they want also. that would be a nice feature also.
|
IceZaroth
|
Posted - 2005.02.25 21:26:00 -
[25]
Signed
|
Jayad
|
Posted - 2005.02.26 02:34:00 -
[26]
 Originally by: Larno
As a side note, I think that no cap should be needed to online modules while next to a ship maintenance array.
i know that CCP didnt want players to online and offline moduals during combat to counter differing threats, obviously that could be exploited.
however i agree tho, at the SMA players should be able to refit there ship without restriction. Maybe there is a reason why this might be exploitable but cant see it.
In regard to POS roles: CCP must be working on it, they were probably just rushed to get it out of programming fast, POS's are very incomplete. THey should have made a statement along this line, but its obvious anyway. Factorys, Labs, POS management, POS containers all have to come in yet.
|
Jayad
|
Posted - 2005.02.26 02:49:00 -
[27]
As another note, CHA's are simply rediculous.
Im going to make a thread about this later, ill provide screnies illustrating my point.
Lost Boys is a large corp, we have many POS's with many players, even then however we have MAJOR difficultys storing stuff ore/personals. we have a refinery and no lie have about 5 CHA's surrounding the bladdy thing. Well its all full, the slow refining rate means not everyone can play in the belts because no storage for later.
CHA's NEED MORE ROOM. 1mill m3 would probably be good enough, its the same size as an SMA so why is capacity 1/5.
|
Jalla Jalla
|
Posted - 2005.02.26 17:37:00 -
[28]
Has anything happend ??
Has somebody sent a petition about it or just naging about it in forum ???? 
It's a must have, and should be sent to CCP 
|
Blitz Tungsten
|
Posted - 2005.02.26 20:18:00 -
[29]
The more people that sign it here, the more obvious it will make this situation to CCP. |
Grendel Ashkervon
|
Posted - 2005.02.26 20:18:00 -
[30]
signed |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |